North Dakota Constitutional Measure 1, Term Limits for Governor and State Legislators Initiative (2022)

North Dakota Constitutional Measure 1
Election date November 8, 2022
Topic Term limits
Status a Approved
Type Constitutional amendment	Origin Citizens

North Dakota Constitutional Measure 1, the Term Limits for Governor and State Legislators Initiative, was on the ballot in North Dakota as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 8, 2022. The measure was approved.

A "yes" vote supported limiting the governor to serving two four-year terms and limiting state legislators to serving eight years in the state House and eight years in the state Senate.

A "no" vote opposed enacting term limits on the governor and state legislators.

Election results

North Dakota Constitutional Measure 1
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		150,363	63.43%
No		86,674	36.57%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

What did Constitutional Measure 1 do?

See also: Text of measure

Going into the election, in North Dakota, the governor and lawmakers each served four-year terms with no limit on the number of terms that may be served.

Constitutional Measure 1 limited the governor to serving two terms. It limited state legislators to serving eight years in the state House and eight years in the state Senate. A member of the House or Senate may not serve a term or remaining portion of a term if it would cause the legislator to have served a cumulative time of more than eight years in the chamber. The measure only applies to individuals elected after approval of the amendment. The measure provided that the provisions of the amendment can only be amended by citizen initiative petitions and not by the state legislature.

What are term limits and how many states have them?

See also: Term limits in the United States

A term limit is a legal restriction that limits the number of terms a person may serve in a particular elected office.

As of 2022, 15 states had term limits on state legislators: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, and South Dakota. In six states, voters approved of term limits, but the measures were later overturned. For Idaho and Utah, the state legislature voted to nullify the limits imposed by voters, while for Massachusetts, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming, courts overturned the voter-imposed limits.

In 36 states, governors are subject to some type of term limits.

Who was behind the campaigns supporting and opposing Constitutional Measure 1?

See also: Support and Opposition

North Dakota for Term Limits led the campaign in support of the initiative. North Dakota for Term Limits said, "Term limits for North Dakota comes with a large number of benefits that include fairer and more competitive elections, increased citizen involvement, a more democratic process, a highly engaged legislative body accountable to and reflective of the electorate, as well as more detailed legislation and better legislative performance.

Lloyd Omdahl (D), former lieutenant governor of North Dakota, said, "By limiting terms, the citizens are telling themselves that democracy in North Dakota has a serious defect: the voters need to be protected from their own inability to make intelligent decisions in the election and re-election of legislators."

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was as follows:

“

Initiated Constitutional Measure No. 1 This initiated measure would add a new article to the North Dakota Constitution. Under the measure, an individual could not serve as a state legislator for a total of more than eight years in either the North Dakota House of Representatives or the North Dakota Senate, separately. It also would prohibit an individual from being elected as Governor more than twice. Service as a member of the legislature or election to the office of governor before the effective date of this measure would not count towards an individual’s eight-year or two-election limit. An individual would not be allowed to serve a full or remaining term as a member of the legislature if serving the term would cause the individual to serve a total of more than eight years in that particular house. Any amendment to this article could not be proposed by the legislature, but only by citizen initiative. The article would become effective on January 1, 2023 if approved by the voters. If the measure conflicts with any other provision of the constitution, the measure states it would prevail over the other constitutional provision. The estimated fiscal impact of this measure is $0 per biennium. YES – means you approve the measure summarized above. NO – means you reject the measure summarized above.

”

Constitutional changes

See also: North Dakota Constitution

Constitutional Measure 1 added a new article to the North Dakota Constitution. The following underlined text was added. Note: Hover over the text and scroll to see the full text.

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT. A new article of the Constitution of the State of North Dakota is created and enacted as follows:

SECTION 1. TERM LIMITS FOR LEGISLATORS. An individual shall not serve as a member of the house of representatives for a cumulative period of time amounting to more than eight (8) years. An individual shall not serve as a member of the senate for a cumulative period of time amounting to more than eight (8) years. An individual shall not be eligible to serve a full or remaining term as member of the house of representatives or the senate if serving the full or remaining term would cause the individual to serve for a cumulative period of time amounting to more than eight (8) years in that respective house.

SECTION 2. TERM LIMITS FOR GOVERNOR. An individual shall not be elected to the office of governor more than twice. This provision shall not prevent the lieutenant governor from succeeding to the office of governor, nor prevent the secretary of state from acting as governor.

SECTION 3. APPLICATION OF TERM LIMITS. The limitations established by this article shall have prospective effect only and service as a member of the house of representatives. service as a member of the senate and prior election to the office of governor shall not be counted against any service or election, respectively, of any individual that occurs after the effective date of this amendment. Service by the lieutenant governor in his capacity as president of the senate shall not count toward the cumulative amount of time an individual may serve as a member of the senate.

SECTION 4. THE PEOPLES TERM LIMITS AMENDMENT. Notwithstanding the legislative assembly's authority to propose amendments to this constitution under Article IV section 16 thereof, the legislative assembly shall not have authority to propose an amendment to this constitution to alter or repeal the term limitations established in section 1 of this article. The authority to propose an amendment to this constitution to alter or repeal the term limitations established in section 1 of this article is reserved to initiative petition of the people under article Ill of this constitution.

SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This amendment shall be effective on the first day of January immediately following approval by voters.

SECTION 6. SEVERABILITY The provisions of this article are severable, and if any provision is held to be invalid. either on its face or as applied the remaining provisions and their application shall not be affected thereby. In any case of a conflict between any provision of this article. and any other provision of this constitution the provisions of this article shall control.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2022

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The secretary of state wrote the ballot language for this measure.

The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 11, and the FRE is 43. The word count for the ballot title is 215.

Support

North Dakota for Term Limits led the campaign in support of Constitutional Measure 1.

Supporters

Organizations

• U.S. Term Limits

Arguments

• Scott Tillman, National Field Director for U.S. Term Limits: "Americans, regardless of political affiliation, believe in term limits for elected officials. North Dakotans regardless of political identity, believe that term limits are needed in the state and proved it by signing the ballot petition in numbers never before seen in North Dakota history."
• North Dakota for Term Limits: "Term limits for North Dakota comes with a large number of benefits that include fairer and more competitive elections, increased citizen involvement, a more democratic process, a highly engaged legislative body accountable to and reflective of the electorate, as well as more detailed legislation and better legislative performance. Nationally, support for term limits for members of Congress is overwhelming, and in most states that sentiment is true for state legislatures as well. We believe that we need bold, dramatic reforms in government that can realign the political power away from the political class, and back to the hands of the people. Recent polling data shows that North Dakota voters across the political spectrum want term limits."

Opposition

Opponents

Officials

• North Dakota Senate Majority Leader Rich Wardner (R)

Former Officials

• Former lieutenant governor of North Dakota Lloyd Omdahl

Arguments

• Lloyd Omdahl (D), former lieutenant governor of North Dakota: "By limiting terms, the citizens are telling themselves that democracy in North Dakota has a serious defect: the voters need to be protected from their own inability to make intelligent decisions in the election and re-election of legislators."

Media editorials

See also: 2022 ballot measure media endorsements

Ballotpedia lists the positions of media editorial boards that support or oppose ballot measures. This does not include opinion pieces from individuals or groups that do not represent the official position of a newspaper or media outlet. Ballotpedia includes editorials from newspapers and outlets based on circulation and readership, political coverage within a state, and length of publication. You can share media editorial board endorsements with us at editor@ballotpedia.org.

Support

Submit links to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Opposition

• Forum Communications Co (InForum) Editorial Board: "The ultimate term limit is the ballot box. If enough voters are dissatisfied with an elected official’s performance, they will vote that officeholder out. It would be foolish to automatically boot competent and popular officials simply because they’ve served some arbitrary term limit. ... Once again, voters already have the ability to vote out any officeholders who lack the support of the majority. That form of term limits, not subject to arbitrary terms of office that fail to take into account individual candidates and the needs of the moment, works well. There’s no need for voters to handcuff themselves."

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for North Dakota ballot measures

The campaign finance information on this page reflects the most recent scheduled reports that Ballotpedia has processed, which covered through December 31, 2022.

ND for Term Limits registered to support the initiative. The campaign reported $27,071.53 in contributions and $13,212.58 in expenditures. U.S. Term Limits gave $20,000 to the committee.

Ballotpedia did not identify committees registered to oppose this measure.

	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Support	$27,071.53	$0.00	$27,071.53	$13,212.58	$13,212.58
Oppose	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
Total	$27,071.53	$0.00	$27,071.53	$13,212.58	$13,212.58

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in support of Measure 1.

Committees in support of Constitutional Measure 1
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
ND for Term Limits	$27,071.53	$0.00	$27,071.53	$13,212.58	$13,212.58
Total	$27,071.53	$0.00	$27,071.53	$13,212.58	$13,212.58

Donors

The following were the top donors the support committee.

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
U.S. Term Limits	$20,000.00	$0.00	$20,000.00
Joe Miller	$500.00	$0.00	$500.00

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Polls

See also: 2022 ballot measure polls

Are you aware of a poll on this ballot measure that should be included below? You can share ballot measure polls, along with source links, with us at editor@ballotpedia.org.

North Dakota Constitutional Measure 1, Term Limits for Governor and State Legislators Initiative (2022)
Poll	Dates	Sample size	Margin of error	Support	Oppose	Undecided

RMG Research Group for U.S. Term Limits	09/09/2022-09/10/2022	500 LV	± 4.5%	81%	13%	6%
	Question: "An amendment to the North Dakota Constitution has been proposed that would place eight-year term limits on the North Dakota State Legislature and Governor. Do you favor or oppose passage of this amendment to the North Dakota Constitution?"

Note: LV is likely voters, RV is registered voters, and EV is eligible voters.

Background

Term limits

See also: Term limits in the United States

A term limit is a legal restriction that limits the number of terms a person may serve in a particular elected office.

There are different types of term limits. Sometimes, there is an absolute limit on the number of terms a person can serve, while in other cases, the restrictions are merely on the number of consecutive terms.

Term limits in North Dakota

In North Dakota, the governor and lawmakers each serve four-year terms, with no limit on the number of terms that may be served. According to AP News, "more than 60 current lawmakers have served eight or more years. Two Republicans, Sen. Ray Holmberg, of Grand Forks, and Rep. Bob Martinson, of Bismarck, have each served more than 40 years."

North Dakota party control

A state government trifecta is a term that describes single party government, when one political party holds the governor's office and has majorities in both chambers of the legislature in a state government. Between 1992 and 2021, North Dakota was under the following types of trifecta control:

• Democratic trifecta: None
• Republican trifecta: 1995-2021
• Divided government: 1992-1994

North Dakota Party Control: 1992-2024
No Democratic trifectas  •  Thirty-one years of Republican trifectas
Scroll left and right on the table below to view more years.

Year	92	93	94	95	96	97	98	99	00	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	25
Governor	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R
Senate	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R
House	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R

Term limits for state legislators across the U.S.

See also: State legislatures with term limits

As of 2022, 15 states had term limits on state legislators: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, and South Dakota. In the United States, there are 1,972 state senate seats and 5,411 state house seats. Of the 7,383 total state legislative seats, 1,930 (26.1%) are term-limited.

Legislative term limits can be either lifetime or consecutive. In the ten states where the limits are consecutive, once a state legislator has served the maximum number of terms in office, he or she, if eligible, can run for office for the state's other legislative chamber, or leave the legislature. These states are Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, and South Dakota. After a period of time no longer in office in a particular legislative chamber, however, the legislator is allowed to run again for office in that legislative chamber. The period of time that a legislator must be out of office before being able to run again is usually two years.

In five of the 15 states with limits on state legislators, the limit is a lifetime limit. These states are California, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, and Oklahoma. In these states, once a legislator has served the maximum allowable number of terms in a particular legislative chamber, they may never again run for or hold office in that particular chamber.

States with legislative limits
Legislature	Limits in effect	Year limits imposed	Year limits took effect
Arizona Legislature	H: 4 terms (8 years) S: 4 terms (8 years)	1992	H: 2000 S: 2000
Arkansas Legislature	12 consecutive years; can return after a four-year break	1992, 2014, modified 2020	H: 1998 S: 2000
California Legislature	12 year cumulative total, in either or both	1990, modified 2012	A: 1996 S: 1998
Colorado Legislature	H: 4 terms (8 years) S: 2 terms (8 years)	1990	H: 1998 S: 1998
Florida Legislature	H: 4 terms (8 years) S: 2 terms (8 years)	1992	H: 2000 S: 2000
Louisiana Legislature	H: 3 terms (12 years) S: 3 terms (12 years)	1995	H: 2007 S: 2007
Maine Legislature	H: 4 terms (8 years) S: 4 terms (8 years)	1993	H: 1996 S: 1996
Michigan Legislature	12 year cumulative total, in either or both	1992, modified 2022	H: 1998 S: 2002
Missouri Legislature	H: 4 terms (8 years) S: 2 terms (8 years)	Amendment 13 (1992) (also see: Amendment 3 (2002)	H: 2002 S: 2002
Montana Legislature	H: 4 terms (8 years) S: 2 terms (8 years)	1992	H: 2000 S: 2000
Nebraska Unicameral	S: 2 terms (8 years)	2000	S: 2008
Nevada Legislature	A: 6 terms (12 years) S: 3 terms (12 years)	Initiative passed in 1996, took effect with those elected in 1998	A: 2010 S: 2010
North Dakota Legislature	H: 2 terms (8 years) S: 2 terms (8 years)	2022	H: 2023 S: 2023
Ohio Legislature	H: 4 terms (8 years) S: 2 terms (8 years)	1992	H: 2000 S: 2000
Oklahoma Legislature	12 year cumulative total, in either or both	1990	H: 2004 S: 2004
South Dakota Legislature	H: 4 terms (8 years) S: 4 terms (8 years)	1992	H: 2000 S: 2000

Term limits that have been overturned

In six states, voters approved of term limits, but would later have these changes nullified. For Idaho and Utah, the state legislature voted to nullify the limits imposed by voters, while for Massachusetts, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming, courts nullified the voter-imposed limits.

By legislature

• The Idaho State Legislature repealed its own term limits in 2002.
• The Utah State Legislature repealed its own term limits in 2003.

By courts

• In 1997, the Massachusetts Supreme Court overturned term limits on the Massachusetts General Court in 1997.
• In 2002, the Oregon Supreme Court overturned the state's term limits on the grounds that the initiative voters approved the imposed term limits had more than one subject.
• The Washington Supreme Court voided state term limits in 1998.
• In 2004, the Wyoming Supreme Court overturned term limits imposed by the state's voters.

Gubernatorial term limits across the U.S.

See also: States with gubernatorial term limits

In 36 states, governors are subject to some type of term limits. Gubernatorial term limits can be either lifetime or consecutive, and may be based on years or terms served. In the 28 states where the limits are consecutive, once a governor has served the maximum number of years or terms, he or she must leave the governor's office. In most cases the person may be able to run for another elected position. After a period of time out of office, usually four years, the person is allowed to run for governor again. In eight states, the term limit for the governor is a lifetime limit. Once a governor has served the maximum allowable number of terms in office, that person may never again run for or hold the office of governor.

Gubernatorial term limits in the U.S.
States	Term limits
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, West Virginia	Two consecutive 4-year terms
Indiana, Wyoming, Oregon	Two consecutive 4-year terms with a one-term pause
Montana	Two consecutive 4-year terms with a two-term pause
Arkansas, California, Delaware, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, Oklahoma	Two four-year terms for a lifetime
Virginia	One consecutive four-year term
Connecticut, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin	No term limits

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in North Dakota

The state process

In North Dakota, the number of signatures required to qualify an initiated constitutional amendment for the ballot is equal to 4 percent of the population of the state. North Dakota is unique in using the population to determine signature requirements for initiatives and referendums. Petitioners may circulate a petition for one year following the secretary of state's initial approval. The signatures must be submitted at least 120 days prior to the election.

The requirements to get an initiated constitutional amendment certified for the 2022 ballot:

• Signatures: 31,164
• Deadline: Each initiative has its own signature deadline of one year after it was approved for circulation. The final deadline to submit signatures regardless of a petition's approval date was July 11, 2022.

Once the signatures have been gathered, the secretary of state verifies them using a random sample method. Since North Dakota does not have a voter registration system, the secretary of state may use "questionnaires, postcards, telephone calls, personal interviews, or other accepted information-gathering techniques" to verify the selected signatures.

Details about this initiative

• The initiative was filed by Jared Hendrix on July 1, 2021. It was approved for signature gathering on July 16, 2021. Sponsors submitted 46,366 signatures on February 15, 2022.
• On March 22, 2022, Secretary of State Al Jaeger ruled that proponents did not submit a sufficient number of valid signatures and that the measure would not appear on the ballot. Jaeger found that of the 46,366 signatures submitted by proponents, 17,625 (38%) were valid and 29,101 (63%) were invalid. Signatures were invalidated for notary errors; address, full name, and date omissions; duplicate signatures; and for petitions signed by those with out-of-state addresses. The Secretary of State's Office and the Bureau of Criminal Investigation said they suspected signatures of being forged and that petition circulators were being paid per signature, which is against state law.
• Sponsors of the measure wrote a letter to Secretary of State Al Jaeger arguing that he rejected signatures unlawfully, alleging, "In your opinion, roughly 29,101 of the signatures submitted by the Committee were invalid for various reasons. Just five days prior, in a meeting in your office with Jared Hendrix (chairperson of the Committee), you indicated that your office had determined that roughly 7,000 signatures were invalid and would not be counted. An additional 22,000 signatures were 'disqualified' in the five days between March 17 and March 22. No expense was spared in attempting to disqualify this petition, and the full scope of the use of taxpayer resources to frustrate the will of the electors is only beginning to come into focus. The state’s validation process here should be subject to a full inquiry."

Sponsors of the measure hired Advanced Micro Targeting to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $329,000.00 was spent to collect the 31,164 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $10.56.

Of the total, $25,000 was paid to Charles Tuttle and Jessica Jaworski to fund signature gathering efforts and $304,000 was paid to Advanced Micro Targeting.

Signature validity lawsuit

  

Lawsuit overview
Issue: Whether North Dakota Secretary of State Al Jaeger was correct in invalidating 29,101 signatures submitted by proponents and whether the measure qualified for the ballot
Court: North Dakota South Central Judicial District Court; North Dakota Supreme Court
Ruling: District court ruled in favor of defendants; state supreme court overturned district court ruling and ordered the measure certified for the 2022 ballot
Plaintiff(s): Jared Hendrix, petition sponsors	Defendant(s): Secretary of State Al Jaeger
Plaintiff argument: Jaeger incorrectly invalidated signatures submitted by proponents; proponents submitted enough signatures for the measure to qualify for the ballot	Defendant argument: Signatures were correctly invalidated and the measure does not qualify for the ballot

  Source: U.S. News and World Report

On August 12, initiative sponsors asked the North Dakota Supreme Court to order Secretary of State Al Jaeger to place the measure on the November ballot, arguing that Jaeger improperly invalidated signatures. The state supreme court ordered a district court to review the claim, which found that Jaeger was correct in invalidating the signatures. District Judge James S. Hill wrote, "Because of these obvious errors, Secretary Jaeger could not, with confidence, state that the other petitions notarized by Toe were without errors or fraud. Therefore, he determined that all of the affidavits notarized by Toe were untrustworthy and none of them could be counted."

On September 7, the state supreme court reversed the district court's ruling, finding that Jaeger misapplied the law when invalidating the signatures, writing, "The Secretary of State applied the logical inference of the common law maxim ‘false in one thing, false in all things." The court found that over 15,000 of the invalidated signatures should have been validated and therefore proponents had submitted enough signatures to qualify the measure for the ballot.

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in North Dakota

Click "Show" to learn more about voter registration, identification requirements, and poll times in North Dakota.

How to cast a vote in North Dakota

Poll times In North Dakota, voting hours at polling locations vary by county. According to statute, all polls must open between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. local time, and they must close between 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. North Dakota is divided between the Central and Mountain time zones. Hours for specific polling places are available online through the state's Polling Place Search. A voter who is standing in line at the time the polls close will be allowed to vote. Registration Check your voter information here. North Dakota is the only state that does not require voter registration. “ Although North Dakota was one of the first states to adopt voter registration prior to the turn of the century, it abolished it in 1951. It is also worth noting that North Dakota law still provides cities with the ability to register voters for city elections. North Dakota is a rural state and its communities maintain close ties and networks. North Dakota's system of voting, and lack of voter registration, is rooted in its rural character by providing small precincts. Establishing relatively small precincts is intended to ensure that election boards know the voters who come to the polls to vote on Election Day and can easily detect those who should not be voting in the precinct. ” —North Dakota Secretary of State Voter ID requirements North Dakota requires voters to present identification while voting. Identification must include the voter’s name, current North Dakota residential address, and date of birth. Acceptable forms of voter identification include: Driver’s license Nondriver’s identification card Tribal government-issued identification (including those issued by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) for a tribe located in North Dakota, any other tribal agency or entity, or any other document that sets forth the tribal member’s name, date of birth, and current North Dakota residential address) Long-term care identification certificate (provided by North Dakota facility) If a voter does not have a form of identification that includes his or her current North Dakota residential address or date of birth, the voter can present the following supplemental documents: Current utility bill Current bank statement Check or a document issued by a federal, state, local, or tribal government (including those issued by BIA for a tribe located in North Dakota, any other tribal agency or entity, or any other document that sets forth the tribal member’s name, date of birth, and current North Dakota residential address) Paycheck Student photo ID card from a North Dakota institution containing the student's photograph and legal name. A printed document on school letterhead containing the student’s name, address, and date of birth must also be presented. North Dakota residents living outside of the United States can submit a U.S. Passport or Military ID if they do not have another valid form of identification. According to the secretary of state's office, "An applicant without an acceptable form of identification may use an attester. The attester must provide his or her name, North Dakota driver’s license, nondriver’s, or tribal identification number, and sign the absentee/mail ballot application form to attest to the applicant’s North Dakota residency and voting eligibility." Voters who cast absentee/mail-in ballot must include a valid form of identification with their ballot. A voter who has a disability that prevents them from leaving his or her home and is unable to obtain a valid form of identification "must provide his or her name, North Dakota driver’s license, nondriver’s, or tribal identification number, and sign the absentee/mail ballot application form to attest to the applicant’s North Dakota residency and voting eligibility."

See also

2022 measures

• 2022 ballot measures
• Term limits on the ballot
• 2022 petition deadlines

North Dakota

• North Dakota ballot measures
• North Dakota initiative laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls
• Ballot measure signature costs

External links

• Full text/approved petition
• Timeline
• North Dakota Secretary of State: Ballot Petitions Being Circulated