Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.

State Ballot Measure Monthly: April 2025

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
2025 U.S. state
ballot measures
2026 »
« 2024
BallotMeasureFinal badge.png
Overview
Scorecard
Tuesday Count
Deadlines
Requirements
Readability
Voter guides
Election results
Campaigns
Polls
Media editorials
Filed initiatives
Finances
Contributions
Signature costs
Ballot Measure Monthly
Signature requirements

April 9, 2025

By Ballot Measures Project staff

This edition of the State Ballot Measure Monthly provides certifications of state ballot measures and notable ballot measure news from March 11 through April 8.

HIGHLIGHTS
  • In Idaho, a constitutional amendment would prohibit citizen-initiated measures on marijuana, psychoactive substances, and narcotics, granting sole authority over the issue to the state legislature.
  • Kansas voters will decide on a constitutional amendment to replace the state's nominating commission with direct elections of state Supreme Court justices in August 2026.
  • A constitutional amendment in North Dakota would let the legislature change term limits by repealing a 2022 voter-approved requirement that only citizen initiatives could do so.

    • 2025 and 2026 ballot measures

    Overview: Nationally, six statewide ballot measures were certified for the ballot in three states in 2025, 26 statewide ballot measures were certified for the ballot in 19 states in 2026.

    Signatures submitted: No initiatives have signatures pending verification.

    Initiatives certified to the legislature: Initiatives pending before state legislatures:

    Comparison to earlier years

    So far, six state ballot measures have been certified for 2025. From 2011 to 2023, the average number of statewide ballot measures in an odd-numbered year was between 33 and 34.

    2025 certifications

    See also: Ballotpedia's Tuesday Count for 2025

    No ballot measures were certified during this period for ballots in 2025.

    2026 certifications

    See also: Ballotpedia's Tuesday Count for 2026

    From March 11 through April 8, ten measures were certified in eight states—Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, New Mexico, and North Dakota.

    March 11:

    March 13:

    • New Mexico Eliminate Governor’s Pocket Veto and Require Veto Explanations Amendment: The amendment would provide that bills automatically become law if the governor does not sign or veto them within three days during the legislative session or within 20 days for bills presented during the last three days of the legislative session. Currently, the governor has the power to pocket veto legislation, which means that the governor effectively vetoes any bill not signed within the required timeframe.

    March 17:

    March 18:

    March 19:

    March 25:

    • Idaho HJR 6, English as Official State Language Amendment: The amendment would amend the Idaho Constitution to make English the official language of the state of Idaho and mandating that English be used in all public proceedings unless other languages are required by federal law. As of 2025, 30 states had designated English as an official language. Three—Alaska, Hawaii, and South Dakota—designated some indigenous languages as co-official alongside English.
    • Kansas Citizenship Voting Requirement Amendment: The measure would amend the Kansas Constitution to specify that in order to vote in Kansas, individuals must be citizens, at least 18 years old, and a resident of the area in which the person is seeking to vote in. From 2018 to 2024, voters decided on 14 ballot measures related to adding language about citizenship requirements for voting. Voters approved all 14 measures.

    April 2:

    • North Dakota State Legislative Term Limits Amendment: The amendment would limit state legislators to serving four complete four-year terms (16 years) in the state legislature regardless of the chamber. A term of less than four years would not count toward the term limit. The state legislature would be authorized to amend term limitations. The amendment would repeal the constitutional provision established by Constitutional Measure 1 of 2022, which provided that term limits could only be amended or repealed by initiative petition and not by the state legislature.

    April 4:

    • Hawaii Increase Time for Senate to Act on Judicial Appointments Amendment: The amendment would increase the timeframe for the state senate to consider and act on appointments of judges and justices from 30 days to 60 days for appointments made between April 1 and December 31 when the senate is not in regular session or is soon to adjourn the regular session. The Hawaii State Legislature is required to convene annually on the third Wednesday in January and meets for 60 legislative days, typically adjourning in early May.

    Headlines

    North Dakota legislature refers amendment to 2026 ballot amending term limits for state legislators approved by voters in 2022

    North Dakota voters will decide in November 2026 whether or not to change term limits for state legislators.

    Under the amendment, legislators could serve four complete four-year terms (about 16 years) in the state legislature regardless of chamber. Partial terms would not count toward the limit. It would also repeal the provision of the 2022 initiative that prohibited the legislature from amending term limitations.

    In 2022, voters approved Constitutional Measure 1 with 63.43% of voters in favor. The initiative, sponsored by State Rep. Jared Hendrix (R-10) and backed by the organization U.S. Term Limits, created term limits for the governor and state legislators.

    It limited state legislators to a maximum of eight years in each chamber—eight years in the state House and eight years in the state Senate—for a total of up to 16 years in the legislature. It also prohibited legislators from serving the remainder of a term if doing so would result in more than eight years of service in that chamber. The initiative applied to individuals elected after approval of the amendment. The measure also provided that term limitations could only be amended by initiative petition and not by the state legislature.

    Hendrix said he would seek an opinion from the attorney general on whether or not the amendment can be placed on the ballot given the 2022 initiative's restriction on legislative amendments to term limits.

    The amendment was sponsored by Sen. Mike Dwyer (R-47). It was approved in the Senate by a vote of 24-23. Of the five Senate Democrats, two voted in favor, and three voted against. Of the 42 Senate Republicans, 22 voted in favor, and 20 voted against. The amendment failed to pass the House in a vote of 46-43 on April 1, but was reconsidered on April 2 and passed by a vote of 53-39 after two Democrats and five Republicans changed their vote. Of the 11 House Democrats, two voted in favor, eight voted against, and one was absent. Of the 83 House Republicans, 51 voted in favor, 33 voted against, and one was absent.

    Rep. Lori VanWinkle (R-3), who voted against the amendment, said, "I don’t know how we’re going to justify overrunning the will of the people. The power reserved to changing term limits is reserved to the initiative process.”[1]

    Rep. Steve Vetter (R-18), who voted against the amendment, said, “The senators don’t want to become representatives. That’s really what this bill is because that’s all it does.”[1] 

    Senate Majority Leader David Hogue (R-38) said that the amendment “just says it’s 16 years — doesn’t matter whether you’re in one chamber or the other — and it’s a full 16 years, so I thought it had some fidelity to the measure that the people passed, although it’s not exactly what they passed."[2]

    North Dakota is one of 16 states with term limits for state legislators. Prior to 2022, North Dakota legislators served four-year terms with no limit on the number of terms that could be served.

    Legislative term limits can be either lifetime or consecutive.

    North Dakota is one of six states with lifetime term limits. The other 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.

    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 the United States, of the total 7,386 state legislative seats, 2,069 (28.0%) are term-limited.


    2025 marks record year as Kansas, Kentucky, and Wyoming join states with laws restricting foreign contributions to ballot measure campaigns

    So far, during the 2025 legislative sessions, three states—Kansas, Kentucky, and Wyoming—have enacted new laws restricting foreign contributions to ballot measure campaigns. With these additions, 12 now have laws prohibiting foreign nationals, governments, or other entities from contributing to ballot measure committees. The 12 states with such laws are California, Colorado, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Washington, and Wyoming. Indiana could also join that list this month, as the legislature passed a bill on April 3 that is currently awaiting action from the governor.

    With three bills passed so far, 2025 marks the highest number of states enacting laws restricting foreign contributions in a single year. In previous years, no more than one state passed a similar law per year.

    Legal Variations

    While 12 states have laws restricting foreign contributions to ballot measure campaigns, the laws differ in several ways, including in how they define foreign nationals. Most states use a definition similar to federal law: persons who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents, foreign governments and political parties, and entities organized under foreign laws or with a principal place of business in a foreign country.

    Some states, like Maine and South Dakota, restrict only foreign governments or government-influenced entities and do not ban foreign individuals from contributing.

    The laws also differ in whether they prohibit only direct foreign contributions or include indirect contributions as well. A direct contribution involves giving money straight to a ballot measure committee. An indirect contribution involves giving money to another group—such as a nonprofit—that then passes the funds on to a ballot measure committee.

    Since Ohio passed House Bill 1 in 2024, the issue of indirect contributions has received more attention from supporters of foreign contribution restriction bills. Several Ohio Republicans, including Secretary of State Frank LaRose, said Hansjörg Wyss, a citizen of Switzerland who lives in Wyoming, is an example of a foreign national contributing to state ballot measure campaigns through an organization. Wyss has donated to the Sixteen Thirty Fund, which contributed at least $22.2 million to 10 campaigns supporting or opposing ballot measures related to abortion, minimum wage and sick leave, ranked-choice voting (RCV), and redistricting in 2024.

    Kansas House Bill 2106

    House Bill 2106 (HB 2106) requires ballot measure campaign finance reports to include a certification stating: (1) the committee has not knowingly accepted any contributions or expenditures—directly or indirectly—from a foreign national, and (2) each donor listed is not a foreign national and has not knowingly received more than $100,000 in contributions or expenditures from a foreign national within the four years before making their contribution or expenditure.

    The bill defined foreign nationals as people who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents; foreign governments; foreign political parties; entities organized under foreign laws; and U.S.-based entities that are wholly or majority-owned by foreign nationals, with exceptions.

    In the Senate, HB 2106 received unanimous support from Democrats and Republicans on March 13. In the House, Republicans voted for the bill, and Democrats were divided 11-25 on Feb. 14.

    Gov. Laura Kelly allowed the bill to go into effect without her signature. She said, "I support stopping foreign influence in our elections so that Kansans can decide what’s best for Kansas. But this bill goes too far. I cannot sign a bill that takes away the ability of Kansans and Kansas businesses to support elections if they accept money from overseas for any purpose, not just those related to elections."[3]

    Rep. Pat Proctor (R-11), who voted for the bill, said, "I want to know every entity that is contributing to a campaign for or against a constitutional amendment. I want to be able to tell Kansans confidently, precisely that the organizations participating in our political process, the individuals participating in our political process, are not using money from foreign nationals to further their campaigns."[4]

    Kentucky House Bill 45

    House Bill 45 (HB 45) prohibits foreign nationals from directly or indirectly making contributions or expenditures related to a ballot measure, soliciting others to do so, or participating in or directing another person's decision to support or oppose a ballot measure.

    The bill defined foreign nationals similarly to Kansas HB 2106: people who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents; foreign governments; foreign political parties; entities organized under foreign laws; and U.S.-based entities that are wholly or majority-owned by foreign nationals, with exceptions.

    In the Senate, Republicans supported HB 45, while all Democrats opposed it on March 11. In the House, the bill passed on March 14 with Republican support, while Democrats were split—4 voted in favor and 12 voted against. Gov. Andy Beshear (D) signed the bill on March 24, 2025.

    Wyoming House Bill 337

    House Bill 337 (HB 337) prohibits foreign donations from being made indirectly to ballot measure committees. This means foreign nationals cannot provide funds to another committee, organization, or individual for the purpose of contributing to a ballot measure committee. It defines foreign nationals based on 52 U.S.C. § 30121(b), which includes foreign governments, political parties, corporations, associations, and individuals. This definition excludes non-citizen U.S. nationals, such as people born in unincorporated territories like American Samoa.

    In the Wyoming State Legislature, HB 337 received support from most legislative Republicans and Democrats. Two—Rep. Bob Nicholas (R-7) and Rep. Liz Storer (D-23)—voted against the bill. 

    Legal Background

    In 2012, the Supreme Court affirmed that, under the Federal Elections Campaign Act (FECA), foreign nationals were prohibited from making contributions to candidates. However, FECA “does not bar foreign nationals from issue advocacy,” according to the affirmed ruling. Campaign finance rules for ballot measures differ from those for candidate elections. “Referenda are held on issues, not candidates for public office,” wrote the U.S. Supreme Court in 1978 (First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti). The court has held that spending on ballot measure campaigns is similar to issue advocacy, such as lobbying, in the lawmaking process.

    The Federal Election Commission, following the court’s orders, has held that ballot measure campaigns are not regulated under FECA. According to the FEC, since ballot measure campaigns are similar to issue advocacy, foreign individuals, corporations, and governments can contribute to them.

    As of April 8, Ballotpedia’s Election Administration Legislation Tracker is following 68 bills related to foreign contributions and campaign finance.

    See also

    Related articles

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 North Dakota Mirror, "Term limits resolution narrowly fails in North Dakota House; reconsideration vote possible Wednesday," April 1, 2025
    2. ↑ Star Tribune, "North Dakota voters banned lawmakers from seeking term limit changes. They did it anyway," April 2, 2025
    3. ↑ KATV, "Three states have implemented bans on foreign funded ballot measures in 2025," April 7, 2025
    4. ↑ Salina Journal, "New Kansas law limits groups funded by foreign money from supporting referendums," April 3, 2025
    v • e
    Ballotpedia Email Updates
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=State_Ballot_Measure_Monthly:_April_2025&oldid=10341124"