Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
North Dakota State Office Appointment Amendment, Measure 1 (June 2012)
| Office Appointment Amendment | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Type | Constitutional amendment |
| Origin | North Dakota State Legislature |
| Topic | Administration of government |
| Status | Approved  |
The North Dakota State Office Appointment Amendment, Measure 1 was on the June 12, 2012 statewide ballot in North Dakota as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment where it was approved. Measure 1 allows state legislators to be appointed to other government offices.[1][2] The amendment further stipulates that the appointment of a member of the Legislative Assembly to a state office for which the compensation was increased more than an increase provided to full-time state employees during the member's term of office is prohibited.[3]
A similar amendment appeared on the ballot in 2008. That measure was defeated with only 43% of the vote in favor.
The measure was sponsored by Rep. Al Carlson.
Election results
The following are official election results:
| Measure 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 96,951 | 60.48% | ||
| No | 63,350 | 39.52% | ||
426 of 426 precincts reporting
Results via the North Dakota Board of Elections.
Text of measure
The measure as it appeared on the ballot:[4]
This constitutional measure would amend and reenact section 6 of Article IV of the North
Dakota Constitution. This measure would prohibit the appointment of a member of the Legislative Assembly to a state office for which the compensation was increased in an amount greater than any general legislative increase provided to full-time state employees during the member's term of office.
YES – means you approve the measure as summarized above. NO – means you reject the measure as summarized above.
Constitutional changes
The measure amends Section 6 of Article IV of the Constitution of North Dakota.[5]
Article IV, Section 6 would be amended to read:
| Text of Section 6:
While serving in the legislative assembly, no member may hold any full-time appointive state office established by this constitution or designated by law. During the term for which elected, no member of the legislative assembly may be appointed to any full-time office |
Support
- Editor's note: According to reports, no organization has formed a campaign in favor of the measure.
- State Representative Kim Koppelman, one of the primary sponsors of the bill, spoke in support of the measure saying, "You know, the framers of the constitution clearly intended legislators to be potentially appointed to their positions in government and they often were. Many people that serve in state government were once legislators but the framers of the constitution also wanted to make sure that they had a safe guard against corruption because the legislature sets pay for all these positions."[6]
Opposition
- Editor's note: According to reports, no organization has formed a campaign against the measure.
- State Senator Mac Schneider stated, "The only people who care are legislators who would like to be appointed to statewide office,” he said. “It doesn’t affect the everyday lives for North Dakota.”
- State Senator Ray Holmberg commented, "I think it will fail. I think there will be reluctance on the part of the people and they might vote against it.”[7]
Media editorial positions
Opposition
- The Minot Daily News published an opinion against the measure, saying, "Voters rejected a similar measure in 2008, and we see no real need to change the rules now."[8]
Other perspectives
Reports out of the state said that the measure did not get a lot of attention from either side. According to Robert Wood, a University of North Dakota professor of political science, "I haven’t seen a lot of advertising for it either way. That leads me to believe this is a fairly low, complicated measure. My guess is the first time people will see this will be when they are in the ballot box.”
According to State Representative Stacey Dahl, no groups officially came out in favor or against the measure.[7]
Path to the ballot
- See also: Amending the North Dakota Constitution
According to the North Dakota Constitution an amendment proposed by either the House or the Senate required only majority approval.
The House approved the measure following a 89-5 vote on April 18.[9]
On April 19, 2011, the Senate voted 37-8 in favor of referring the measure to the ballot.[10] Previously, the House approved the measure following a 89-5 vote on April 18.[11]
Timeline
The following is a timeline of events surrounding the measure:
| Event | Date | Developments |
|---|---|---|
| Approval | April 18, 2011 | The House approved the measure following a 89-5 vote. |
| Final Approval | April 19, 2011 | The Senate voted 37-8 in favor of referring the measure to the ballot. |
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Associated Press, "ND Lawmakers Target Restriction on Government Jobs," March 9, 2011 (dead link)
- ↑ Associated Press, "Amendment would help ND lawmakers get govt jobs," April 20, 2011
- ↑ North Dakota Secretary of State measure analysis
- ↑ Measure 1, retrieved from Secretary of State, April 25, 2012
- ↑ North Dakota Legislature, "HCR 3047 full text," accessed April 20, 2011
- ↑ WDAY "Taking a closer look at North Dakota Measure 1," June 4, 2012
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 Inforum, "Even supporters think Measure 1 may fail," June 6, 2012 (dead link)
- ↑ Minot Daily News, "Reject Measure 1, Measure 2," June 7, 2012
- ↑ North Dakota General Assembly, "HCR 3047 actions," accessed April 20, 2011
- ↑ Associated Press, "ND lawmakers want constitutional amendment to make them eligible for government appointments," April 19, 2011
- ↑ North Dakota General Assembly, "HCR 3047 actions," accessed April 20, 2011
 |
State of North Dakota Bismarck (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | 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 |
