Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Democracy is on the ballot in nine states this fall

Arizona ballot measures

Voters in Arizona will decide multiple ballot measures that directly impact how democracy and voting work in their state.

Courtney Pedroza/Getty Images

There’s more at stake on Election Day than federal, state and local races. Voters in 37 states will decide the fate of 132 ballot initiatives, including a handful that could change how the democratic process works in nearly a dozen states.

Ballotpedia, the nonprofit organization that bills itself as the “digital encyclopedia of American politics,” has identified ballot measures affecting election administration in seven states as well as proposals in three states to change the ballot measure process itself.


A ballot measure, or ballot initiative, is a policy proposal to be decided by the voters of a state rather than by the legislature. About half the states have a process through which citizens can create initiatives and get them on the ballot. In others, such proposals are driven by the government.

Efforts to change the ballot initiative process are not new. In fact, RepresentUs recently released a study tracking five years’ worth of attempts to alter the rules.

“When our government isn’t responsive to the people, ballot initiatives are one of the tools that can rein in the power of self-interested politicians and give it back to the voters – where it belongs,” said RepresentUs CEO Joshua Graham Lynn. “Instead of spending their time strangling the voice of the people, elected officials need to uphold it. What are they so afraid of?”

Following is a breakdown of the proposals on the ballot this fall.

Initiatives impacting initiatives

On Nov. 8, voters in three states will determine whether to change the process.

In Arizona, the ballot questions are actually three proposed amendments to the state Constitution. The first would permit state lawmakers to change or defund ballot-approved laws if either the Arizona Supreme Court or the U.S. Supreme Court rules them unconstitutional. Opponents of the measure say it would give legislators too much power to override the will of the voters while supporters say it is necessary for fixing laws.

A second proposed amendment would require future ballot initiatives to address a single issue (and also require a clear description in the measure’s title).

The third measure would raise the threshold for approving ballot measures creating taxes to 60 percent of voters, more inline with the two-thirds requirement in the Legislature for creating taxes.

In Arkansas, a proposed constitutional amendment would change the requirement for approving future ballot initiatives from a simple majority to a three-fifths supermajority (in this case 60 percent of ballots cast). That requirement would apply to both citizen-driven and legislatively proposed initiatives. According to Ballotpedia, just 11 states currently require something more than a majority for constitutional amendments and no states require a supermajority for citizen-led state statutes (with a few specific exceptions in Florida, Utah and Washington).

Voters in South Dakota rejected a measure similar to the Arkansas proposal in June.

Finally, in Colorado, a ballot initiative would require future measures related to taxes to include details on the impact of such proposals.

Voting impacting voting

The seven voting-related measures cover voter identification, noncitizen voting, ranked-choice voting and more.

Arizona, the only state on both lists, has a ballot initiative that would require additional information from people who want to vote by mail. Currently, voters must sign early ballot envelopes, but the proposed measure would also require them to include their birth date and government ID number. It would also require all in-person voters to show photo identification. Current law allows voters to prevent two items, such as utility bills, that prove name and address in lieu of a photo ID.

A proposal on the ballot in Connecticut would allow no-excuse early voting. Connecticut is among five states that have restricted early voting.

Michigan voters, who already demonstrated the power of ballot measures by removing politics from the redistricting process a few years ago, will now decide whether to make changes to the voting process. A proposed constitutional amendment would ensure military overseas ballots postmarked by Election Day are counted, allow for an affidavit in place of a photo ID for voting purposes, allow the use of drop boxes and require a nine-day early-voting period. It would also create voter protections against harassment.

In Louisiana, voters will decide whether to amend their Constitution to ensure local governments do not allow noncitizens to vote. No city in the state is among the handful across the country that allows such a practice. The Louisiana vote will take place on Dec. 10, because the state uses Nov. 8 as a primary election.

Like Arizonans, the people of Nebraska will decide whether to change the voter ID requirements. The state does not currently require a person to present photo identification in order to vote, but a proposed constitutional amendment would change that.

Nevada may take the next step toward becoming the third state (after Maine and Alaska) to use ranked-choice voting for congressional and state elections. The proposal, which must be approved by voters in both 2022 and 2024, would create an open primary with the five candidates who receive the most votes regardless of party advance to an RCV general election. Alaska recently debuted its “top four” system.

Ohio, like Louisiana, is considering a constitutional amendment banning noncitizens from voting. In 2019, the people of Yellow Springs passed a measure allowing noncitizens to vote.


Read More

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Close-up of sign reading 'Immigrants Make America Great' at a Baltimore rally.

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Donald Trump’s second administration has fully clarified Latinos’ racial position in America: our ethnic group’s labor, culture, and aspirations are too much for his supporters to stomach. The Latino presence in America triggers too many uneasy questions (are they White?), too many doubts (are they really American?), and too much resentment (why are they doing better than me?).

Trump’s targeted deportations of undocumented Latinos, unwarranted arrests of Latino citizens, and heightened ICE presence in Latino neighborhoods address these worries by lumping Latinos with Black people. Simply put, we have become yet another visible population that America socially stigmatizes, economically exploits, and politically terrorizes because aggrieved White adults want to preserve their rank as our nation’s premier racial group. The cumulative impacts are serious: just yesterday, an international panel of investigators on human rights and racism, backed by the U.N., found that such actions have resulted in “grave human rights violations.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules
A close up of a window with a sticker on it
Photo by Zach Wear on Unsplash

Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules

Last week, I wrote a column in the Fulcrum entitled “Just the Facts: Voter ID, States’ Powers, and Federal Limits.” The facts presented in that writing made it clear that the U.S. Constitution does not require voter ID and left almost all election administration—including voter qualifications—to the states. However, over time, constitutional amendments and federal statutes have restricted states’ ability to impose discriminatory voting rules, but they have never mandated voter ID.

The SAVE America Act

The national debate over voter ID has entered a new phase with the introduction of the SAVE America Act, the most sweeping federal voter‑identification and citizenship‑documentation proposal in modern history. For more than two centuries, voter eligibility rules—ID included—have been primarily a matter of state authority, bounded by constitutional protections against discrimination. The SAVE America Act would shift that balance by imposing federal requirements for both photo identification and documentary proof of citizenship in federal elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
Posters are displayed next to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) as he speaks at a news conference to unveil the Take It Down Act to protect victims against non-consensual intimate image abuse, on Capitol Hill on June 18, 2024 in Washington, DC.

A lawsuit against xAI over AI-generated deepfakes targeting teenage girls exposes a growing crisis in schools. As laws struggle to keep up, this story explores AI accountability, teen safety, and what educators and parents must do now.

Getty Images, Andrew Harnik

Deepfakes: The New Face of Cyberbullying and Why Parents, Schools, and Lawmakers Must Act

As a former teacher who worked in a high school when Snapchat was born, I witnessed the birth of sexting and its impact on teens. I recall asking a parent whether he was checking his daughter’s phone for inappropriate messages. His response was, “sometimes you just don’t want to know.” But the federal lawsuit filed last week against Elon Musk's xAI has put a national spotlight on AI-generated deepfakes and the teenage girls they target. Parents and teachers can’t ignore the crisis inside our schools.

AI Companies Built the Tool. The Grok Lawsuit Says They Own the Damage.

Whether the theory of French prosecutors–that Elon Musk deliberately allowed the sexualized image controversy to grow so that it would drive up activity on the platform and boost the company’s valuation–is true or not, when a company makes the decision to build a tool and knows that it can be weaponized but chooses to release it anyway, they are making a risk-based decision believing that they can act without consequence. The Grok lawsuit could make these types of business decisions much more costly.

Keep ReadingShow less