Your monthly support provides voters the knowledge they need to make confident decisions at the polls. Donate today.
States where qualified ballot initiatives can be withdrawn
From Ballotpedia
In states where qualified ballot initiatives can be withdrawn from the ballot, proponents of the initiative are able to withdraw an initiative already qualified for the ballot.
Of the 26 states that provide for statewide citizen-initiated ballot measures, four states—California, Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada—provide for the ability for initiative proponents to withdraw qualified measures from the ballot.
HIGHLIGHTS
Requirements by state
Four states—California, Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada—provide for the withdrawal of ballot initiatives that have already qualified for the ballot.
The following map provides information on states where qualified ballot initiatives can be withdrawn:
States where qualified ballot initiatives can be withdrawn
The following table outlines the states where ballot initiatives can be withdrawn after being certified for the ballot:
| States where qualified ballot initiatives can be withdrawn | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| State | Withdrawal policy | Law | |
| California | Proponents of citizen-initiated ballot measures, including initiatives and veto referendums, can withdraw a qualified measure 131 days before the next general election | Assembly Bill No. 421 | |
| Colorado | Designated representatives of the proponents of a ballot initiative can file a letter to the secretary of state requesting to remove the petition from the ballot no later than 60 days prior to the election. | Colorado Electoral Code 1-40-134 | |
| Idaho | Has previously allowed for an initiative campaign to withdraw a certified ballot measure from the ballot in 2022. | ||
| Nevada | The designated initiative campaign representatives can withdraw an initiative up to 90 days before an election | Nevada Revised Statutes, Chapter 295, Section 26 | |
Legislation
The following is a list of bills passed, beginning in 2016, related to withdrawal of ballot initiatives that have already qualified for the ballot.
2023
- Assembly Bill 421: The legislation made changes to the veto referendum process in California, including:[1]
- replacing "Yes" and "No" with “Keep the law” and “Overturn the law,” respectively. Before AB 421, when a veto referendum appeared on the ballot, voters could select “Yes” or “No”. A “Yes” vote had the effect of upholding a bill, and a “No” vote had the effect of repealing the bill.
- requiring the ballot title for veto referendums to be formatted as a question, rather than a statement. The question shall be formatted as follows: “Should California keep or overturn a law passed in [year statute was enacted] [no more than 15 words stating the general subject or nature of the law]?”
- presenting the top three funders of the petition drive to repeal the law in the voter information guide.
- allowing veto referendum proponents to withdraw their qualified referendum within a certain number of days before the election.
| AB 421 Vote | Senate | House | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | NV | Yes | No | NV | |
| Total | 30 | 9 | 1 | 55 | 17 | 8 |
| Democratic (D) | 30 | 1 | 1 | 55 | 0 | 7 |
| Republican (R) | 0 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 1 |
2019
- Senate Bill 681: The legislation allowed proponents of local initiatives to withdraw their measures up to 88 days before the election.[2]
2018
- Senate Bill 1153: The legislation allowed proponents of a local ballot initiative to withdraw the initiative up to 88 days prior to an election.[3]
Lawsuits
The following is a selection of case law and litigation regarding the withdrawal of ballot initiatives that have qualified for the ballot.
- Cegavske v. Hollowood et al. (2022): On June 28, 2022, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled that sponsors of certified statewide ballot initiatives could have their initiatives withdrawn. In 2021, the Legislature passed a bill allowing initiative sponsors to withdraw measures after having signatures verified up to 90 days before the election. Justice Lidia Stiglich wrote, "Article 19 of the Nevada Constitution sets out the initiative petition process, does not specifically bar withdrawal of an initiative petition, and permits the Legislature to enact statutes facilitating the initiative-petition process."[4]
- In 2021, the Clark County Education Association sponsored two initiatives—a sales tax initiative and a gaming tax initiative—that qualified for the ballot following signature drives. However, following negotiations with the legislature, the sponsors reached a compromise and agreed to withdraw the initiatives.
- Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske (R) said the Nevada Constitution did not grant her the power to remove initiatives from the ballot. She cited the constitutional provision that directs her office to place initiatives on the ballot once sufficient signatures are verified. Sponsors filed a lawsuit against Cegavske. On March 9, 2021, First Judicial District Court Judge James Wilson ruled against Cegavske, writing, "Reading the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions in harmony, the Secretary of State’s ministerial duty in this instance becomes clear: take no further action on these initiative petitions."[5] On March 15, 2022, Cegavske appealed the ruling.[6]
Arguments
The following is a list of claims and arguments about the policy of withdrawing a certified ballot measure from the ballot.
Support
- State President Darrell Steinberg (D-6), who was the lead sponsor of California SB 1253, which allowed for the process to withdraw certified initiatives from the ballot 131 days before the general election, said, "By allowing an initiative proponent to withdraw their measure closer to the election, it allows for the possibility of reasoned compromise and a better result between the people's elected government and the people's initiative alternative."[7]
Oppose
- Sen. Joel Anderson (R-38), who voted against SB 1253, said the bill "would undermine Californians’ access to full participation in our democracy by restricting their ability to put initiatives before their fellow voters."[7]
See also
Footnotes
- ↑ California State Legislature, "Assembly Bill 421," accessed September 9, 2023
- ↑ California State Legislature, "Senate Bill 681," accessed June 25, 2023
- ↑ California State Legislature, "Senate Bill 1153," accessed June 28, 2023
- ↑ Nevada Supreme Court, Cegavske v. Hollowood, June 28, 2022
- ↑ The Nevada Independent, "Judge rules sales, gaming tax petitions must be taken off 2022 ballot," March 9, 2022
- ↑ Las Vegas Review-Journal, "Cegavske will appeal ruling on withdrawal of tax-hike initiatives," March 15, 2022
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 Los Angeles Times, "Gov. Brown approves major changes in initiative process," September 27, 2014
