State Ballot Measure Monthly: March 2019
From Ballotpedia
| 2019 U.S. state ballot measures | |
|---|---|
2020 »
« 2018
| |
 | |
| Overview | |
| Tuesday Count | |
| Scorecard | |
| Deadlines | |
| Requirements | |
| Lawsuits | |
| Readability | |
| Voter guides | |
| Election results | |
| Year-end analysis | |
| Campaigns | |
| Polls | |
| Media editorials | |
| Filed initiatives | |
| Finances | |
| Contributions | |
| Signature costs | |
| Ballot Measure Monthly | |
| Signature requirements | |
Have you subscribed yet?
Join the hundreds of thousands of readers trusting Ballotpedia to keep them up to date with the latest political news. Sign up for the Daily Brew.
| |
By Ballot Measures Project staff
This edition of the State Ballot Measure Monthly covers certifications and notable ballot measure news from February 16, 2019, through March 15, 2019.
HIGHLIGHTS
- altering signature requirements,
- requiring county clerks to post the names of those who sign an initiative petition on county websites,
- requiring funding sources to be specified, and
- establishing rolling signature submission deadlines.
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Number of certifications in past years:
- 2017: By the second Tuesday in March, five measures had been certified for the 2017 ballot.
- Ultimately, 27 statewide measures were on the ballot in 2017.
- 2015: By the second Tuesday in March, five measures had been certified for the 2015 ballot.
- Ultimately, 28 statewide measures were on the ballot in 2015.
- 2013: By the second Tuesday in March, one measure had been certified for the 2013 ballot.
- Ultimately, 31 statewide measures were on the ballot in 2013.
- 2011: By the second Tuesday in March, six measures had been certified for the 2011 ballot.
- Ultimately, 34 statewide measures were on the ballot in 2011.
- Even-numbered years: At this point in the election cycles from 2012 through 2018 an average of 10 measures were certified for the next even-year election cycle. From 2012 through 2018, an average of 169 measures were certified to appear on the general election ballot.
2019 certification updates
No statewide ballot measures were certified to appear on 2019 ballots in the last month, leaving the 2019 certification count at one.
2020 certifications
From February 16, 2019, to March 15, 2019, the following measure was certified for the 2020 ballot:
February 21:
- Wyoming Constitutional Amendment A, Municipal Debt for Sewage Systems Measure (2020) - This proposed constitutional amendment would remove the constitutional limit on additional debt that a municipality may incur for municipal sewer projects and allow the legislature to provide for new rules governing municipal sewer project debt. Currently, the limit is debt equal to 4 percent of the assessed value of taxable property within the city. The state House approved the amendment 45-12 on January 24, 2019, and the state Senate approved it 27-3 on February 21, 2019. The Senate's vote certified the amendment for the November 2020 ballot. The only opposition in the legislature was from Republicans. Wyoming has a Republican state government trifecta.
March 6:
- Utah Constitutional Amendment A, Gender-Neutral Constitutional Language Amendment (2020) - This proposed constitutional amendment would remove gender-specific language in the Utah Constitution and replace it with gender-neutral language. It was passed unanimously in both chambers of the Utah State Legislature.
March 7:
- Arkansas Issue 1, Transportation Sales Tax Continuation Amendment (2020) - This proposed constitutional amendment would continue indefinitely an existing 0.5 percent sales tax with revenue directed to state and local transportation, including highways, roads, and bridges. Voters approved Issue 1, authorizing the temporary tax, in 2012. After approval, it became Amendment 91 in the state constitution.
- Issue 1 of 2012 authorized the 0.5 percent sales tax to be levied until $1.3 million in general obligation bonds were repaid. Issue 1 earmarked the bond revenue for the construction of a four-lane highway and required repayment by 2023.
- Nebraska Amendment 1, Remove Slavery as Punishment for Crime from Constitution Amendment (2020) - This amendment would remove language from the Nebraska Constitution that allows the use of slavery and involuntary servitude as criminal punishments. The amendment was approved unanimously in the Nebraska State Senate.
- The Nebraska Constitution is one of 21 state constitutions that ban slavery or involuntary servitude but include an exception for criminal punishment. Likewise, the Thirteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution includes an exception clause permitting slavery or involuntary servitude of people convicted of crimes.
March 12:
- Utah Constitutional Amendment D, Municipal Water Resources Amendment (2020) - This proposed constitutional amendment would specify the circumstances under which a municipality may commit water resources or supply water outside its boundary or exchange water resources and revise provisions surrounding municipal water rights. It was approved with one dissenter in each chamber of the Utah State Legislature and placed on the November 2020 ballot.
March 13:
- Utah Constitutional Amendment B, Legislator Qualifications Amendment (2020) - This amendment would specify that qualifications of a legislator—such as age and voter status—must apply as of the time of election or appointment rather than at the time a legislator assumes office. The amendment was passed unanimously in both chambers of the Utah State Legislature, placing it on the November 2020 ballot.
- Currently, the state constitution does not specify when the qualifications must apply.
- Utah Constitutional Amendment C, Remove Slavery as Punishment for a Crime from Constitution Amendment (2020) - This amendment would remove from the state constitution an exception to the prohibition of slavery and involuntary servitude in the case of punishment for a crime. The amendment was passed unanimously in both chambers of the Utah State Legislature, placing it on the November 2020 ballot.
- The Utah Constitution is one of 21 state constitutions that ban slavery or involuntary servitude but include an exception allowing one or both to be used as a criminal punishment. Likewise, the Thirteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution includes an exception clause permitting slavery or involuntary servitude for people convicted of crimes.
March 14:
- New Mexico Public Regulation Commission Amendment (2020) - This amendment would amend the state constitution to change the Public Regulation Commission (PRC) from an elected five-member commission to an appointed three-member commission. It was approved 36-5 in the state Senate and 59-8 in the state House.
Arkansas and Utah legislatures pass changes to initiative process
In the last month, the Arkansas and Utah legislatures passed bills changing the initiative processes in those states. Critics of the bills argued that they make the initiative processes more difficult.
In 2018, Arkansas voters approved two citizen initiatives: one increasing the state's minimum wage and one authorizing four new casinos. In 2016, Arkansas voters approved a medical marijuana initiative. Utah voters approved three citizen initiatives in 2018, two of which were altered by the state legislature after the election. The Utah 2018 initiatives concerned redistricting, medical marijuana, and Medicaid expansion. Prior to 2018, Utah voters last decided citizen-initiated measures in 2007 and 2004.
Utah:
The Utah State Legislature approved four bills changing the state's initiative process:
- House Bill 195 would do the following:
- change the signature requirement for initiatives and referendums from 10 percent (5 percent for indirect initiatives) of votes cast at the last presidential election to 8 percent (4 percent for indirect initiatives) of active voters in the state, thereby increasing the signature requirement threshold.
- change the signature submission deadline and the deadline for signature removal requests to February 15 before the election;
- change the deadline for initiatives to be certified for the ballot from June 1 to April 15; and
- makes changes regarding arguments for or against ballot measures and statements prepared by the lt. governor in response to them as well as other changes to the initiative and referendum process.
- Utah Senate Bill 151 would do the following:
- require initiative petitions to contain a summary of all funding sources (with percentages) for the costs associated with the proposed law;
- require the fiscal impact statement for an initiative to be prepared by the Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst instead of the Governor's Office of Management and Budget;
- require the fiscal impact statement for initiatives to include a funding source summary;
- set requirements for the display and disbursement of fiscal impact statement summaries at required public hearings on initiatives;
- allow other courts besides the state supreme court to review challenges regarding ballot title challenges; and
- make other changes to the state's initiative and referendum laws.
- Utah House Bill 145 would do the following:
- require county clerks to post the names of registered voters who sign initiative and referendum petitions on the county website;
- make changes to the format and contents of initiative and nominating petition sheets;
- require individual petition sheet packets to be submitted no later than 30 days for initiatives or 14 days for veto referendums after the date of the first signature on the packet, thereby requiring signatures to be submitted as they are collected instead of all at once before the deadline;
- require certain stages of signature verification to be completed as signatures are submitted rather than all at once after all signatures have been submitted;
- change the deadline and process for signature removal requests; and
- make other changes to the initiative and nomination petition process.
- The bill's sponsor, Sen. Curt Bramble (R), said that the names of initiative and referendum petition signers were already public information.[1]
- Sen. Gene Davis (D) said, “As I read through this bill, this is so rife with the ability for someone to harass someone who has signed a petition.”[1]
- Utah House Bill 133 would push back the default effective date for citizen initiatives to allow the legislature a chance to consider alteration prior to implementation. For initiatives unrelated to taxes, the effective date would be 60 days following the last day of the legislative session immediately following the election at which the initiative is approved. For initiatives that increase taxes, HB 133 would set the effective date to be January 1 of the year following the next general legislative session after the election. For tax decreasing initiatives, it would set the effective date to be five days after the governor issues the proclamation of election results for the initiative. HB 133 was also designed to allow courts other than the Utah Supreme Court to consider challenges to determinations about whether two measures are in conflict.
- Sen. Curt Bramble (R), who sponsored SB 133 said, "The essence of this bill is to give an intervening legislative session after an initiate [sic] passes, in the event that there needs to be technical cleanup or changes to the initiative."[1]
Lauren Simpson, the policy director for the Alliance for a Better Utah, said, “In combination, these are bad bills meant to hamper the right of Utahns to create their own laws through the initiative process."[1]
Arkansas:
The Arkansas state legislature gave final approval to Senate Bill 346 and sent it to the governor on March 6, 2019. The bill would do the following:
- make the state board of election commissioners, rather than the attorney general, responsible for approving a filed initiative and its ballot title and popular name;
- change the timeline for approval of the ballot title and popular name to after signatures are submitted;
- establish that, once signatures are submitted, if the board of elections does not approve the ballot title and popular name, the initiative petition is insufficient and cannot be certified for the ballot even if enough signatures were submitted;
- and enact other provisions related to signature verification, approval of the ballot title and popular name, and related petitions to the Arkansas Supreme Court.
- The state Senate approved SB 346 in a vote of 26-5 on February 25, 2019. All 26 Republicans in the Senate voted in favor of it, five Democrats voted against it and four did not vote. The state House approved SB 346 78-13 on March 5, 2019. Seventy-one Republicans voted in favor of the bill in the House, two voted against it, and three did not vote. Eleven House Democrats voted against the bill, seven voted in favor of it, and six did not vote. Arkansas is one of 22 Republican trifectas.
- Senate Bill 346 was supported by Attorney General Leslie Rutledge. Rutledge said, "This streamlined process will increase transparency by ensuring a public and bipartisan debate for all ballot measures proposed by Arkansans."
- The bill's opponents argued that it could make the initiative process harder. They said that the state board of election commissioners could reject initiatives and ballot titles after signatures were collected and verified. This possibility, opponents said, would make funding a signature drive riskier. Melissa Fults, Executive Director of the Drug Policy Education Group, is working on a marijuana legalization initiative in Arkansas. Fults said, "They're [the election commissioners] going to be prejudice on the subject whether they're a liberal group and you have a conservative message or if you're a conservative group and you have a liberal message."
- Sen. Mathew Pitsch (R) said the bill realigns the state process with the existing constitutional provisions.
Context from past years
States that are likely to feature statewide measures in 2019
Out of the 26 states with a process for citizen-initiated measures, Colorado, Maine, Ohio, and Washington allow ballot initiatives or veto referendums to appear on the ballot in odd-numbered years. Citizen-initiated measures could have gone on the Mississippi ballot in 2019 because of the gubernatorial election. No citizen initiative qualified for the Mississippi ballot. Legislatively referred measures can also go on the ballot in these states in 2019.
Louisiana, New Jersey, New York, and Texas legislatures frequently refer statewide measures to the ballot odd-numbered years.
See also
- 2019 ballot measures
- 2020 ballot measures
- List of ballot measures by state
- List of ballot measures by year
- Ballot initiatives filed for the 2019 ballot
- Ballot Measure Scorecard, 2019
- Ballot Measure Scorecard, 2020
- Ballotpedia's Tuesday Count for 2019
- Ballotpedia's Tuesday Count for 2020
Related articles
Footnotes
| |||||
