|
|
| (11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{2018 SBM VNT}} | | {{MeasuresAnalysisVNT |
| | |AnalysisName= Ballot measure campaign finance, 2018 |
| | |Year=2018 |
| | |YearBefore=2017 |
| | |YearBeforePage=Ballot measure campaign finance, 2017 |
| | |YearAfter=2019 |
| | |YearAfterPage=Ballot measure campaign finance, 2019}} |
|
| |
|
| This page summarizes the campaign finance data for statewide ballot measures certified to go before voters in 2018.
| | In [[2018 ballot measures|2018]], 167 statewide ballot measures were on the ballot in 38 states. Voters approved 116 (70%) and rejected 50 (30%) ballot measures. |
| | |
| | <section begin=CF2018Intro/>Campaigns to support or oppose statewide measures on ballots in 2018 received $1.21 billion ($1,206,623,790) in contributions to support or oppose statewide measures on ballots.<section end=CF2018Intro/> |
|
| |
|
| ==Overview== | | ==Overview== |
| <section begin=Intro/>
| | ===Comparison to other years=== |
| Ballotpedia tracked '''$1.186 billion''' in contributions to the ballot measure campaigns supporting and opposing the {{#dpl:
| | <section begin=CF2018Comparison/> |
| |categorymatch = Certified,%
| | {{CampaignFinanceEvenYearComparison}} |
| |category = State ballots, 2018
| | <section end=CF2018Comparison/> |
| |notcategory = Did not make ballot in 2018
| | To view ballot measure campaign finance totals for prior years, click [[State ballot measure campaign finance analyses|here]]. |
| |notnamespace = Talk
| |
| |notnamespace = Category
| |
| |notnamespace = Category_talk
| |
| |notnamespace = File
| |
| |notnamespace = Template
| |
| |format=,
| |
| |resultsheader=%PAGES%
| |
| |noresultsheader=0
| |
| }} certified 2018 measures and '''$1.16 billion in expenditures''' by those campaigns. These figures included both cash contributions and expenditures as well as in-kind goods and services. Support campaigns raised about 51 percent of the campaign funds. The {{#dpl:
| |
| |category = Initiated amendment certified for the 2018 ballot{{!}}Initiated statute certified for the 2018 ballot{{!}}Veto referendum certified for the 2018 ballot
| |
| |notcategory = Did not make ballot in 2018
| |
| |notnamespace = Talk
| |
| |notnamespace = Category
| |
| |notnamespace = Category_talk
| |
| |notnamespace = File
| |
| |notnamespace = Template
| |
| |format=,
| |
| |resultsheader=%PAGES%
| |
| |noresultsheader=0
| |
| }} [[Ballot initiative|citizen-initiated]] measures featured about 83 percent of the campaign finance activity.
| |
| <section end=Intro/> | |
| :: ''Note: This page contains information about the campaign finance for measures certified for 2018 ballots. {{Greener | start = 09/10/2018 | before = It does not list information for measures that could potentially reach the ballot but are not yet certified. To read articles about potential 2018 measures—some of which do cover campaign finance activity—[[Potential 2018 ballot measures|click here]].''| after = It does not list information for measures that were proposed for the 2018 ballot but were not put on the ballot. To read articles about 2018 measures that did not make the ballot—some of which do cover campaign finance activity—[[:Category: Did not make ballot in 2018|click here]].''}}
| |
|
| |
|
| This total of $1.185 billion includes contributions to campaigns supporting or opposing the 12 pre-November ballot measures. Contributions for pre-November ballot measure campaigns amounted to about $38 million.
| | ===Contributions by state=== |
| | | <section begin=CF2018TopStates/> |
| In [[Ballot measure campaign finance, 2016|2016]], Ballotpedia tracked $1.01 billion in ballot measure campaign contributions for the 162 statewide ballot measures.
| | States reported the following ballot measure campaign contributions: |
| | |
| ===Contributions for individual measures=== | |
| <section begin=TopMeasures2018/> | |
| The five measures that featured the most in campaign contributions tracked by Ballotpedia were [[California Proposition 8, Limits on Dialysis Clinics' Revenue and Required Refunds Initiative (2018)|California Proposition 8]], an initiative to limit the revenue of dialysis clinics and require refunds; [[Nevada Question 3, Changes to Energy Market and Prohibit State-Sanctioned Electric-Generation Monopolies Amendment (2018)|Nevada Question 3]], an initiative on it's second and final round at the ballot to require deregulation of energy markets and the elimination of energy monopolies; [[California Proposition 10, Local Rent Control Initiative (2018)|California Proposition 10]], an initiative to allow local rent control; [[Arizona Proposition 127, Renewable Energy Standards Initiative (2018)|Arizona Proposition 127]], an initiative to increase the state's renewable portfolio standards requirement; and [[California Proposition 6, Voter Approval for Future Gas and Vehicle Taxes and 2017 Tax Repeal Initiative (2018)|California Proposition 6]], an initiative to repeal fuel tax increases and vehicle fees that were enacted in 2017 and require voter approval for future gas taxes.
| |
| | |
| Three of the top 10 measures on November ballots featuring the most campaign contributions in support and opposition were in California, and two were in Florida. The following table illustrates the outcomes of the top ten measures:
| |
| | |
| <center>{{MostExpensiveMeasures2018Outcome}}</center>
| |
| | |
| Summaries of the top ten November measures with most contributions to the support and opposition campaigns are listed below:
| |
| | |
| {{Scroll box | width = auto | height = 400px |
| |
| :: <small>''Click on each link to see what the measure was designed to do, arguments and endorsements in support and opposition, a list of top donors, and more.''</small>
| |
| | |
| * [[California Proposition 8, Limits on Dialysis Clinics' Revenue and Required Refunds Initiative (2018)|California Proposition 8: Limits on Dialysis Clinics' Revenue and Requirement Refunds Initiative]] {{#Dpl: |title = California Proposition 8, Limits on Dialysis Clinics' Revenue and Required Refunds Initiative (2018) | include = {Ballot box}:status image}} - The support campaign raised $18.9 million—95 percent of which was from the labor organization [[SEIU-UHW West]]. The opposition campaign raised $111.5 million—98 percent of which came from dialysis companies DaVita, Fresenius Medical Care North America, and U.S. Renal Care.
| |
| | |
| * [[Nevada Question 3, Changes to Energy Market and Prohibit State-Sanctioned Electric-Generation Monopolies Amendment (2018)|Nevada Question 3: Legislature to Minimize Regulations on the Energy Market and Eliminate Legal Energy Monopolies Initiative]] {{defeated}} - The support campaign raised $33.4 million, and the opposition raised $64.0 million.
| |
| ** Las Vegas Sands Corporation and Switch were the two largest contributors to the support campaign. NV Energy was the largest contributor to the opposition campaign providing 99.9 percent of the funds.
| |
| ** In Nevada, initiated constitutional amendments need to be approved in two even-numbered election years. On the ballot as Question 3 in 2016, this amendment was approved once.
| |
| ** The totals reported here applied only to the committees active following January 2017. For Question 3 of 2016, a combined total of $4.35 million was raised between supporters and opponents. The support committee, Nevadans for Affordable, Clean Energy Choices, raised $3.44 million. The opposition committee, No Handouts to Billionaires Committee, received $910,000.
| |
| | |
| * [[California Proposition 10, Local Rent Control Initiative (2018)|California Proposition 10: Local Rent Control Initaitive]] {{#Dpl: |title = California Proposition 10, Local Rent Control Initiative (2018) | include = {Ballot box}:status image}} - This initiative would have allowed local governments to adopt laws and regulations to govern how much landlords can charge tenants for renting apartments and houses. The support campaign raised $25.3 million—with 91 percent of funds received from the [[AIDS Healthcare Foundation]]. The opposition campaign raised $71.4 million. The largest opposition contributions of $8.0 million, $6.6 million, and $5.8 million, respectively, were from (a) the California Association of Realtors Issues Mobilization PAC; (b) Essex Property Trust, Inc., and Affiliated Entities; and (c) Blackstone Property Partners, L.P.; Breit MF Holdings LLC; Blackstone Real Estate Partners (VI Through VIII), L.P.; and their Holdings.
| |
| | |
| * [[Arizona Proposition 127, Renewable Energy Standards Initiative (2018)|Arizona Proposition 127: Renewable Energy Standards Initiative]] {{#Dpl: |title = Arizona Proposition 127, Renewable Energy Standards Initiative (2018) | include = {Ballot box}:status image}} - This initiative would have required electric utilities in Arizona to acquire a certain percentage of electricity from renewable resources each year, with the percentage increasing annually from 12 percent in 2020 to 50 percent in 2030. The support campaign raised $24.1 million, and the opposition campaign raised $40.9 million. The largest donor to the support campaign was [[NextGen Climate Action]], founded by Tom Steyer. NextGen Climate Action contributed 95 percent of support contributions. The largest donor to the opposition campaign was the Pinnacle West Capital Corporation, which provided $40 million.
| |
| | |
| * [[California Proposition 6, Voter Approval for Future Gas and Vehicle Taxes and 2017 Tax Repeal Initiative (2018)|California Proposition 6: Voter Approval for Future Gas and Vehicle Taxes and 2017 Tax Repeal Initiative]] {{#Dpl: |title = California Proposition 6, Voter Approval for Future Gas and Vehicle Taxes and 2017 Tax Repeal Initiative (2018) | include = {Ballot box}:status image}} - This initiative would have repealed fuel tax increases and vehicle fees that were enacted in 2017—including the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (RRAA)—and required voter approval (via ballot propositions) for the California State Legislature to impose, increase, or extend fuel taxes or vehicle fees in the future. The ballot measure committee Repeal the Gas Tax - Give Voters A Voice led the campaign in support of Proposition 6. The Repeal the Gas Tax and allied committees raised $5.1 million, including $467,143 from the California Republican Party; $300,000 from Kevin McCarthy's campaign committee; $250,000 from John Cox's campaign committee; and $250,000 from Protect Prop. 13, A Project of the [[Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association]].
| |
| | |
| : On July 3, 2018, The Coalition to Protect Local Transportation Improvements, which supported [[California Proposition 69, Transportation Taxes and Fees Lockbox and Appropriations Limit Exemption Amendment (June 2018)|Proposition 69]], reorganized as No on Prop 6. No on Prop 6 and allied committees raised $46.7 million. Around $1.2 million was spent on Proposition 69 and local ballot measures, leaving the opposing campaign with about $45.5 million for opposition to Proposition 6. The largest contributors to the opposition committees included the California Alliance for Jobs - Rebuild California Committee ($5.0 million), the Laborers Pacific Southwest Regional Organizing Coalition Issues PAC ($1.9 million), Southern California District Council of Laborers Issues PAC ($1.7 million), Members' Voice of the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California ($1.6 million), and International Union of Operating Engineers ($1.5 million).
| |
| | |
| * [[Washington Initiative 1631, Carbon Emissions Fee Measure (2018)|Washington Initiative 1631: Carbon Emissions Fee Measure]] {{#Dpl: |title = Washington Initiative 1631, Carbon Emissions Fee Measure (2018) | include = {Ballot box}:status image}} - This initiative was designed to establish a carbon fee applied to large sources of carbon emissions. The support committees Clean Air Clean Energy WA and Fuse Voters raised $16.4 million. The top donors to the support campaign were The Nature Conservancy, the League of Conservation Voters, and Bill and Melinda Gates. The opposition campaign was funded by two different committees: No on 1631 (Sponsored by Western States Petroleum Association) and I-1631 Sponsored by the Association of Washington Business. Together the two committees raised $31.6 million. The top donors in opposition to the measure were BP America, Phillips 66, and Andeavor.
| |
| | |
| * [[Florida Amendment 3, Voter Approval of Casino Gambling Initiative (2018)|Florida Amendment 3: Voter Approval of Casino Gambling Initiative]] {{#Dpl: |title = Florida Amendment 3, Voter Approval of Casino Gambling Initiative (2018) | include = {Ballot box}:status image}} - The support campaign raised $46.2 million. The support campaign received its largest contributions from the Seminole Tribe of Florida ($24.3 million) and [[Disney Worldwide Services, Inc.]] ($20.6 million). The opposition campaign raised $1.8 million. West Flagler Associates, LTD, contributed $1.5 to the opposition campaign.
| |
|
| |
|
| * [[Florida Amendment 6, Marsy's Law Crime Victims Rights, Judicial Retirement Age, and Judicial Interpretation of Laws and Rules Amendment (2018)|Florida Amendment 6: Marsy's Law, Judicial Retirement Age, and Judicial Interpretation of Laws and Rules]] {{#Dpl: |title = Florida Amendment 6, Marsy's Law Crime Victims Rights, Judicial Retirement Age, and Judicial Interpretation of Laws and Rules Amendment (2018) | include = {Ballot box}:status image}} - This amendment was put on the ballot by the [[Florida Constitution Revision Commission]] and was designed to do three things: (1) add a [[Marsy's Law crime victim rights|''Marsy's Law'' crime victim bill of rights]] to the constitution, (2) increase the judicial retirement age from 70 to 75 years of age, and (3) prohibit state courts from deferring to an administrative agency’s interpretation of a state statute or rule in lawsuits. The committee registered in support of the measure is Marsy's Law for Florida. The committee received a total of $46.2 million in contributions. Marsy's Law for All Foundation and Henry Nicholas, the founder of Marsy's Law for All, provided all of the committee's contributions. In Florida, a 60 percent supermajority is required for approval of a constitutional amendment.
| | <datatable |
| | caption="Ballot measure campaign contributions by state, 2018" |
| | width="50%" |
| | colwidths="30%,25%,45%" |
| | sortable="yes" |
| | paginate="yes" |
| | rowsperpage="10" |
| | > |
| | ! State !! Measures !! align="right"|Contributions |
| | |- |
| | | [[California 2018 ballot measures|California]] || 16 || $380,795,573 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Florida 2018 ballot measures|Florida]] || 12 || $126,176,281 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Nevada 2018 ballot measures|Nevada]] || 6 || $107,241,852 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Washington 2018 ballot measures|Washington]] || 5 || $80,118,650 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Arizona 2018 ballot measures|Arizona]] || 5 || $76,149,622 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Colorado 2018 ballot measures|Colorado]] || 13 || $70,439,321 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Missouri 2018 ballot measures|Missouri]] || 8 || $49,148,155 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Massachusetts 2018 ballot measures|Massachusetts]] || 3 || $46,420,967 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Montana 2018 ballot measures|Montana]] || 4 || $36,689,335 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Oregon 2018 ballot measures|Oregon]] || 6 || $34,836,571 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Michigan 2018 ballot measures|Michigan]] || 3 || $32,164,578 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Arkansas 2018 ballot measures|Arkansas]] || 3 || $24,031,944 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Ohio 2018 ballot measures|Ohio]] || 2 || $19,604,631 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Georgia 2018 ballot measures|Georgia]] || 7 || $18,680,537 |
| | |- |
| | | [[North Carolina 2018 ballot measures|North Carolina]] || 6 || $17,987,402 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Idaho 2018 ballot measures|Idaho]] || 2 || $15,042,549 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Oklahoma 2018 ballot measures|Oklahoma]] || 6 || $13,640,789 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Alaska 2018 ballot measures|Alaska]] || 1 || $13,480,926 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Kentucky 2018 ballot measures|Kentucky]] || 1 || $10,190,000 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Utah 2018 ballot measures|Utah]] || 7 || $9,980,862 |
| | |- |
| | | [[South Dakota 2018 ballot measures|South Dakota]] || 6 || $9,407,601 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Alabama 2018 ballot measures|Alabama]] || 4 || $3,218,242 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Nebraska 2018 ballot measures|Nebraska]] || 1 || $2,966,975 |
| | |- |
| | | [[North Dakota 2018 ballot measures|North Dakota]] || 4 || $2,217,928 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Louisiana 2018 ballot measures|Louisiana]] || 6 || $2,151,940 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Hawaii 2018 ballot measures|Hawaii]] || 1 || $1,480,000 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Maryland 2018 ballot measures|Maryland]] || 2 || $1,206,456 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Maine 2018 ballot measures|Maine]] || 6 || $708,328 |
| | |- |
| | | [[New Mexico 2018 ballot measures|New Mexico]] || 6 || $331,188 |
| | |- |
| | | [[Wisconsin 2018 ballot measures|Wisconsin]] || 1 || $87,723 |
| | |- |
| | | [[New Hampshire 2018 ballot measures|New Hampshire]] || 2 || $17,564 |
| | |- |
| | | [[West Virginia 2018 ballot measures|West Virginia]] || 2 || $9,299 |
| | </datatable> |
| | <section end=CF2018TopStates/> |
|
| |
|
| * [[Massachusetts Question 1, Nurse-Patient Assignment Limits Initiative (2018)|Massachusetts Question 1: Nurse-Patient Assignment Limits Initiative]] {{#Dpl: |title = Massachusetts Question 1, Nurse-Patient Assignment Limits Initiative (2018) | include = {Ballot box}:status image}} - This initiative was designed to establish patient assignment limits for registered nurses working in hospitals. The support committee, the Committee to Ensure Safe Patient Care, raised $12.0 million. The Massachusetts Nurses Association provided 96 percent of the support contributions. The opposition committee, the Coalition to Protect Patient Safety, raised $24.9 million. The Massachusetts Health & Hospital Association provided 95 percent of the opposition contributions.
| | ===Measures with most contributions=== |
| | <section begin=CF2018TopMeasures/> |
| | Campaigns surrounding the following 10 ballot measures had received the most contributions: |
|
| |
|
| * [[Colorado Proposition 112, Minimum Distance Requirements for New Oil, Gas, and Fracking Projects Initiative (2018)|Colorado Proposition 112: Minimum Distance Requirements for New Oil, Gas, and Fracking Projects]] {{#Dpl: |title = Colorado Proposition 112, Minimum Distance Requirements for New Oil, Gas, and Fracking Projects Initiative (2018) | include = {Ballot box}:status image}} - This initiative would have mandated that new oil and gas development projects, including fracking, be a minimum distance of 2,500 feet from occupied buildings and other areas designated as vulnerable. Colorado Rising for Health and Safety and allied support committees raised $1.7 million. The top donor was the Food and Water Watch Action Fund, which provided $445,984.00 to the support campaign. Protecting Colorado's Environment, Economy, and Energy Independence—also known as Protect Colorado—was registered to oppose Proposition 112. The committee raised a net of $31.9 million, with the largest amounts from the Anadarko Petroleum Corp. ($6.9 million), Noble Energy Inc. ($6.2 million), and PDC Energy ($5.6 million). The Protect Colorado committee provided an additional $10.8 million in contributions to '''the Committee for Colorado's Shared Heritage''', a committee which supported [[Colorado Amendment 74, Compensation to Owners for Decreased Property Value Due to State Regulation Initiative (2018)|Amendment 74]]. Amendment 74 was designed to require property owners to be compensated for any reduction in property value caused by state laws or regulations.
| | <datatable |
| }}
| | caption="Top 10 ballot measures by campaign contributions, 2018" |
| <section end=TopMeasures2018/>
| | width="100%" |
| | | colwidths="43%,19%,19%,19%" |
| ===Contributions by state===
| | sortable="yes" |
| <section begin=TopStates2018/>
| | > |
| <html>
| | ! Measure !! align="right"|Total !! align="right"|Support !! align="right"|Opposition |
| <iframe id="datawrapper-chart-kF1WE" src="//datawrapper.dwcdn.net/kF1WE/5/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important;" height="399"></iframe><script type="text/javascript">if("undefined"==typeof window.datawrapper)window.datawrapper={};window.datawrapper["kF1WE"]={},window.datawrapper["kF1WE"].embedDeltas={"100":665,"200":513,"300":475,"400":437,"500":437,"700":399,"800":399,"900":399,"1000":399},window.datawrapper["kF1WE"].iframe=document.getElementById("datawrapper-chart-kF1WE"),window.datawrapper["kF1WE"].iframe.style.height=window.datawrapper["kF1WE"].embedDeltas[Math.min(1e3,Math.max(100*Math.floor(window.datawrapper["kF1WE"].iframe.offsetWidth/100),100))]+"px",window.addEventListener("message",function(a){if("undefined"!=typeof a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var b in a.data["datawrapper-height"])if("kF1WE"==b)window.datawrapper["kF1WE"].iframe.style.height=a.data["datawrapper-height"][b]+"px"});</script></html>
| | |- |
| <section end=TopStates2018/>
| | | [[California Proposition 8, Limits on Dialysis Clinics' Revenue and Required Refunds Initiative (2018)|California Proposition 8, Limits on Dialysis Clinics' Revenue and Required Refunds Initiative]] || $130,426,208 || $18,943,228 || $111,482,980 |
| The states with the most ballot measure campaign finance activity reported in support of or opposition to all 2018 measures certified for the ballot were as follows:
| | |- |
| | | | [[Nevada Question 3, Changes to Energy Market and Prohibit State-Sanctioned Electric-Generation Monopolies Amendment (2018)|Nevada Question 3, Changes to Energy Market and Prohibit State-Sanctioned Electric-Generation Monopolies Amendment]] || $97,392,955 || $33,432,598 || $63,960,356 |
| {{col-begin}}
| | |- |
| {{col-break}}
| | | [[California Proposition 10, Local Rent Control Initiative (2018)|California Proposition 10, Local Rent Control Initiative]] || $96,662,282 || $25,295,591 || $71,366,691 |
| 1. [[California 2018 ballot propositions|California]] - $369,313,672.27 in contributions<br>
| | |- |
| 2. [[Nevada 2018 ballot measures|Nevada]] - $127,633,657.23 in contributions<br>
| | | [[Arizona Proposition 127, Renewable Energy Standards Initiative (2018)|Arizona Proposition 127, Renewable Energy Standards Initiative]] || $65,221,251 || $24,126,340 || $41,094,911 |
| 3. [[Florida 2018 ballot measures|Florida]] - $126,176,280.94 in contributions<br>
| | |- |
| 4. [[Washington 2018 ballot measures|Washington]] - $79,942,232.45 in contributions<br>
| | | [[California Proposition 6, Voter Approval for Future Gas and Vehicle Taxes and 2017 Tax Repeal Initiative (2018)|California Proposition 6, Voter Approval for Future Gas and Vehicle Taxes and 2017 Tax Repeal Initiative]] || $51,880,776 || $5,161,189 || $46,719,588 |
| 5. [[Arizona 2018 ballot measures|Arizona]] - $76,149,621.83 in contributions<br>
| | |- |
| 6. [[Colorado 2018 ballot measures|Colorado]] - $70,409,321.18 in contributions<br>
| | | [[Washington Initiative 1631, Carbon Emissions Fee Measure (2018)|Washington Initiative 1631, Carbon Emissions Fee Measure]] || $47,989,746 || $16,398,382 || $31,591,365 |
| 7. [[Missouri 2018 ballot measures|Missouri]] - $47,843,819.55 in contributions<br>
| | |- |
| 8. [[Massachusetts 2018 ballot measures|Massachusetts]] - $46,420,966.99 in contributions<br>
| | | [[Florida Amendment 3, Voter Approval of Casino Gambling Initiative (2018)|Florida Amendment 3, Voter Approval of Casino Gambling Initiative]] || $47,921,505 || $46,151,663 || $1,769,842 |
| {{col-break}}
| | |- |
| 9. [[Montana 2018 ballot measures|Montana]] - $35,463,345.66 in contributions<br>
| | | [[Massachusetts Question 1, Nurse-Patient Assignment Limits Initiative (2018)|Massachusetts Question 1, Nurse-Patient Assignment Limits Initiative]] || $39,342,673 || $12,419,621 || $26,923,051 |
| 10. [[Oregon 2018 ballot measures|Oregon]] - $34,836,571.08 in contributions<br>
| | |- |
| 11. [[Michigan 2018 ballot measures|Michigan]] - $32,164,577.74 in contributions<br>
| | | [[Florida Amendment 6, Marsy's Law Crime Victims Rights, Judicial Retirement Age, and Judicial Interpretation of Laws and Rules Amendment (2018)|Florida Amendment 6, Marsy's Law Crime Victims Rights, Judicial Retirement Age, and Judicial Interpretation of Laws and Rules Amendment]] || $38,215,025 || $37,252,863 || $962,162 |
| 12. [[Ohio 2018 ballot measures|Ohio]] - $19,604,630.89 in contributions<br>
| | |- |
| 13. [[North Carolina 2018 ballot measures|North Carolina]] - $17,987,402.46 in contributions<br>
| | | [[Colorado Proposition 112, Minimum Distance Requirements for New Oil, Gas, and Fracking Projects Initiative (2018)|Colorado Proposition 112, Minimum Distance Requirements for New Oil, Gas, and Fracking Projects Initiative]] || $33,506,244 || $1,685,375 || $31,820,869 |
| 14. [[Idaho 2018 ballot measures|Idaho]] - $15,042,549.32 in contributions<br>
| | </datatable> |
| 15. [[Alaska 2018 ballot measures|Alaska]] - $13,480,926.45 in contributions
| | <section end=CF2018TopMeasures/> |
| {{col-end}}
| |
|
| |
|
| ==2018 ballot measure contributions== | | ==2018 ballot measure contributions== |
| The charts below list all of the measures certified to appear on the ballot in 2018, along with the supporting and opposing contributions for each measure, the outcome of each measure—when available—and the date on which the campaign finance information was last updated. Blank cells in the charts below indicate that campaign finance information is unavailable or not yet compiled.
| |
|
| |
| Click on the arrows at the top of each column to sort the data according to that column. Measures put on the ballot through citizen petitions generally attract more spending than measures put before voters by the legislature. The measures listed below are broken out into one chart for [[ballot initiative|citizen initiatives]] and [[veto referendum]]s and another chart for [[Legislative_referral|legislative referrals]] and [[Automatic ballot referral|automatic ballot referrals]].
| |
|
| |
|
| ===Initiatives and veto referendums===
| | The following tables list statewide measures on ballots in 2018, support and opposition contributions for each measure, and the outcome of each measure. |
| The measures listed in this section were put on the ballot through [[petition|citizen signature petition campaigns]] to propose a new law through initiatives or to seek the repeal of a law passed by the legislature through a veto referendum. | |
|
| |
|
| {{#Dpl:
| | ===Citizen-initiated ballot measures=== |
| |categorymatch = Certified,%
| |
| |category = Initiated amendment certified for the 2018 ballot{{!}}Initiated statute certified for the 2018 ballot{{!}}Veto referendum certified for the 2018 ballot
| |
| |include = {SBMTotalCampaignCash}:support, {SBMTotalCampaignCash}:opposition, {Ballot box}:status image
| |
| |format = <table class="sortable" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="1" style="background:none; width:auto;"><tr style="background-color:#00008B; color: white;"><th width="45%">Ballot Measure:</th><th width="20%">Support contributions:</th><th width="20%">Opposition contributions:</th><th width="5%">Outcome:</th></tr>,\n,,</table>
| |
| |secseparators = <tr><td>[[%TITLE%]]</td><td>$,,</td><td>$,,</td><td align="center">,,</td>
| |
| }}
| |
|
| |
|
| ===Legislative and automatic referrals===
| | The following table lists citizen-initiated ballot measures, including veto referendums, that were placed on the ballot through a signature drive. |
| The measures listed below were put on the ballot by the state legislature or automatically required by a state law or the state constitution. These types of measures usually generate less campaign spending than initiatives and veto referendums. | |
|
| |
|
| {{#Dpl:
| | <APIWidget where=" SUBSTRING ( election_dates.date ,0 , 5 ) = '2018' and ballot_measures.type::text in ('Combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute', 'Indirect initiated constitutional amendment', 'Indirect initiated state statute', 'Initiated constitutional amendment', 'Initiated state statute', 'Initiated advisory question', 'Veto referendum') and ballot_measures.status::text in ('On the ballot', 'Qualified for the ballot', 'Approved','Defeated', 'Too close to call', 'Overturned', 'Pending judicial ruling post-election')" template='BallotMeasureCFStateSummary' /> |
| |categorymatch = Certified,%
| |
| |category = Referred amendment certified for the 2018 ballot{{!}}Referred statute certified for the 2018 ballot{{!}}Automatic ballot referral certified for the 2018 ballot{{!}}Commission-referred ballot measure certified for the 2018 ballot{{!}}Advisory vote certified for the 2018 ballot{{!}}Bond issue certified for the 2018 ballot
| |
| |include = {SBMTotalCampaignCash}:support, {SBMTotalCampaignCash}:opposition, {Ballot box}:status image
| |
| |format = <table class="sortable" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="1" style="background:none; width:auto;"><tr style="background-color:#00008B; color: white;"><th width="45%">Ballot Measure:</th><th width="20%">Support contributions:</th><th width="20%">Opposition contributions:</th><th width="5%">Outcome:</th></tr>,\n,,</table>
| |
| |secseparators = <tr><td>[[%TITLE%]]</td><td>$,,</td><td>$,,</td><td align="center">,,</td>
| |
| }}
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Comparison to prior years== | | ===Referred ballot measures=== |
| | The following table lists referred ballot measures. Legislatures voted to place these measures on the ballot, or the measures, such as constitutional convention questions, were put on the ballot through an automatic legal process. |
|
| |
|
| In [[Ballot measure campaign finance, 2016|2016]], contributions to ballot measure campaigns exceeded a combined total of $1 billion. The average amount spent on a ballot measure was $6.2 million, with $12.3 million as the average for the 76 citizen-initiated measures and $881,907 as the average for the 86 legislative and automatic referrals.
| | <APIWidget where=" SUBSTRING ( election_dates.date ,0 , 5 ) = '2018' and ballot_measures.type::text in ('Legislatively referred advisory question', 'Automatic ballot referral', 'Bond issue', 'Commission-referred state statute', 'Constitutional convention referral', 'Automatic constitutional convention question', 'Legislatively referred constitutional convention question', 'Legislatively referred constitutional amendment', 'Legislatively referred state statute', 'Commission-referred constitutional amendment') and ballot_measures.status::text in ('On the ballot', 'Qualified for the ballot', 'Approved','Defeated', 'Too close to call', 'Overturned', 'Pending judicial ruling post-election')" template='BallotMeasureCFStateSummary' /> |
|
| |
|
| {{SBMTotalCampaignFinanceAveragesYear}} | | ==Contributions by year== |
| | {{SBMCampaignFinanceComparison}} |
|
| |
|
| ==See also== | | ==See also== |
