Why do some constitutional amendment elections tend to have higher levels of turnout than others quizlet?

Specific Types

States with citizen initiatives (24): Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, Wyoming

States may have the direct initiative, the indirect initiative or the choice of either.

In the indirect initiative process, a proposed initiative is referred to the legislature after proponents have gathered the required number of signatures. The legislature has the option to enact, defeat or amend the measure. Depending on the legislature's action, the proponents may continue to pursue placement on the ballot for a popular vote. In three states (Massachusetts, Ohio and Utah), proponents must gather additional signatures to place the measure on the ballot; in the others, it automatically goes to the ballot.

For direct initiatives, proponents collect signatures and place the measure directly on the ballot once it’s certified and verified.

States with direct initiatives (19): Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington

States with indirect initiatives (10): Alaska, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, Ohio, Utah, Washington, Wyoming

States with popular referendums (23): Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Idaho, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington Wyoming.

Year Established:
Citizen Initiative

Alaska: 1956
Arizona: 1911
Arkansas: 1910
California: 1911
Colorado: 1912
Florida: 1972
Idaho: 1912
Illinois: 1970
Maine: 1908
Massachusetts: 1918
Michigan: 1908
Mississippi: 1914
Missouri: 1908
Montana: 1904
Nebraska: 1912
Nevada: 1905
North Dakota: 1914
Ohio: 1912
Oklahoma: 1907
Oregon: 1902
South Dakota: 1898
Utah: 1900
Washington 1912
Wyoming: 1968

Subject Matter Restrictions and Repeating a Measure

States may limit the subject matter of ballot measures. States may apply a single-subject rule or other restrictions. States sometimes limit how soon a measure can be re-attempted.

Single-Subject Rule

Fifteen states follow a single-subject rule:

• Alaska (AS § 15.45.040)
• Arizona (for constitutional amendments, not statutes) (A.R.S. Const. Art. 21 § 1; CV–16–0314-SA)
• California (Cal.Const. Art. 2, § 8)
• Colorado (C.R.S.A. Const. Art. 5, § 1)
• Florida (C.R.S.A. Const. Art. 5, § 1)
• Missouri (V.A.M.S. Const. Art. 3, § 50)
• Montana (MT CONST Art. 5, § 11; Art. 5, § 11; MACo v. The State of Montana, MT 267 [2017])
• Nebraska (Ne.Rev.St. CONST. Art. III, § 2)
• Nevada (N.R.S. 295.009)
• Ohio (O.R.C. § 3519.01)
• Oklahoma (OK Const. Art. 5, § 57; Art. 24, § 1)
• Oregon (OR CONST Art. IV, § 1)
• Utah (U.C.A. 1953 § 20A-7-202; U.C.A. 1953, Const. Art. 6, § 22)
• Washington (RCWA Const. Art. 2, § 19; Amalgamated Transit Union Local 597 v. State of Washington, 11 P.3d 762 [2000])
• Wyoming (Const. Art. 3, § 24)

Nine states do not have a single-subject rule:

Arkansas, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, North Dakota and South Dakota.

Additional Subject Restrictions

Aside from single-subject rules, seven states have no additional subject restrictions on what can be in initiatives: Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Oklahoma, Oregon, Utah and Washington.

Other states vary when it comes to restrictions, ranging from specific vote thresholds on certain topics to disallowing certain issues. Some states limit the number of sections of code or the constitution that may be altered. Seventeen states have subject matter limitations other than the single-subject rule:

Repeating a Measure

Seventeen states do not provide for any limitation on attempting to repeat a specific measure: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota and Washington.

Of course, in some of the above states, timelines concerning filing, signature gathering and deadlines for signatures and the indirect initiative process may impose limits not otherwise spelled out in statute.

Seven states impose explicit limits for how much time must pass before a measure is re-attempted, ranging from 12 months to five years:

Petition Application Process

Most states require proponents of a proposed law to follow guidelines. These guidelines may include an application process, registering a certain number of sponsors, submitting the full text and an explanation of the measure, affidavits, the office or offices to file with, registering a proponent or opposition organization, campaign finance issues and the process for withdrawing an initiative.

Application and Filing Requirements

Seven states require filing an initial number of signatures or registering of sponsors as part of an application to fully circulate an initiative:

Four states require a filing fee in statute:

Eighteen states require proponents to file application materials with the state’s secretary of state:

• Arizona (A.R.S. § 19-111)
• Arkansas (AR Const. Art. 5, § 1; A.C.A. § 7-9-104)
• California (Cal.Elec.Code § 9001, 9004; Cal.Const. Art. 2, § 8)
• Colorado (C.R.S.A. § 1-40-105)
• Idaho (§ 34-1804)
• Maine (M.R.S.A. Const. Art. 4, Pt. 3, § 18 and 21-A M.R.S.A. § 901)
• Massachusetts (M.G.L.A. Const. Amend. Art. 48, Init., Pt. 2, § 3)
• Michigan (M.C.L.A. 168.471 and M.C.L.A. 168.472)
• Mississippi (Miss. Code Ann. § 23-17-1)
• Missouri (V.A.M.S. 116.332)
• Montana (MCA 13-27-202)
• Nebraska (Neb. Rev. St. § 32-1405)
• Nevada (N.R.S. Const. Art. 19, § 1)
• North Dakota (NDCC Const. Art. 3, § 2)
• Oklahoma (OK Const. Art. 5, § 3; 34 Okl.St.Ann. § 8)
• Oregon (OR CONST Art. IV, § 1)
• South Dakota (SDCL § 12-13-25.1; 12-13-26; 2-1-1-1; 2-1-1-2)
• Wyoming (W.S.1977 § 22-24-302)

Two states require proponents to file application materials with the lieutenant governor:

• Alaska (AS § 15.45.020)
• Utah (U.C.A. 1953 § 20A-7-202)

Five states require proponents to file application materials with the attorney general:

• California (Cal.Elec.Code § 9001, 9004; Cal.Const. Art. 2, § 8)
• Idaho (I.C. § 34-1804, § 34-1809)
• Massachusetts (M.G.L.A. Const. Amend. Art. 48, Init., Pt. 2, § 3)
• Ohio (O.R.C. § 3519.01)
• South Dakota (SDCL § 12-13-25.1; 12-13-26)

Four states require filing with another entity:

Campaign Finance

All 24 citizen initiative states require political organizations supporting or opposing a ballot measure—almost always considered political action committees—to follow state campaign finance laws. These include filing reports and designating organization officers. The following is not a legal, comprehensive list of every campaign finance law governing the initiative process in each state, but rather provides a starting guide of where to find relevant statutes:

• Alaska: AS § 15.13.040; § 15.13.050; § 15.13.065; § 15.13.110
• Arizona: A.R.S. § 16-906, § 16-926
• Arkansas: A.C.A. § 7-9-404; 405; 406; 407; 408; 409
• California: Cal.Gov.Code § 82013, 84200, 84202.3, 85309, 84511, 84101, Cal.Elec.Code § 18680; Form 460
• Colorado: C.R.S.A. § 1-45-103, § 1-45-108.3, § 1-45-111.5§ 1-45-117
• Florida: F.S.A. § 106.08, § 106.19
• Idaho: I.C. § 67-6602, § 67-6607
• Illinois: 10 ILCS 5/9-15
• Maine: 21-A M.R.S.A. § 1051, 1052, 1052-A, 1053-B, 1054, 1054-A, 1055, 1055-A, 1056, 1056-A, 1056-B, 1057, 1058, 1059, 1060, 1062-A, 1062-B
• Massachusetts: M.G.L.A. 55 § 1, § 6B, § 7A, § 18C, § 18
• Michigan: M.C.L.A. 169.234; 169.247
• Mississippi: Miss. Code Ann. § 23-17-47; § 23-17-49; § 23-17-51; § 23-17-53
• Missouri: V.A.M.S. 130.110; 130.120; 130.029; 130.046; 130.041
• Montana: MCA 13-27-112; 13-27-113
• Nebraska: Neb.Rev.St. § 49-1401
• Nevada: N.R.S. Const. Art. 2, § 10; N.R.S. 295.009; 294A.150; 294A.220
• North Dakota: NDCC, 16.1-08.1-02.4; 16.1-08.1-03.1; 16.1-08.1-03.2
• Ohio: O.R.C. § 3517.01, .08, .10, .11, 12, .13, .20, .092, .093, .102, .105; O.H.R. § 3599.03
• Oklahoma: 34 Okl.St.Ann. § 2; 21 Okl.St.Ann. § 187; Okl.St.Ann. Rule 2.36; Okl.St.Ann. Rule 2.79; Oklahoma Ethics Commission's Guide for Political Action Committees
• Oregon: O.R.S. § 250.045; § 260.035; § 260.054
• South Dakota: SDCL § 12-27-22; SDCL § 12-27-3
• Utah: U.C.A. 1953 § 20A-11-101; § 20A-11-801; § 20A-11-802; § 20A-11-803
• Washington: RCWA 42.17A.005; 42.17A; 42.17A.205
• Wyoming: W.S.1977 § 22-1-102; § 22-24-201; § 22-24-306

Withdrawing an Initiative

Nine states have an explicit process for withdrawal of an initiative from circulation:

Fourteen states do not have any process for withdrawal: Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Utah, Washington and Wyoming.

Petition Content

In every state, petitions must follow guidelines, which vary by state. Petitions always include a title and/or summary of the proposed measure, although who writes this information varies. Several states require two officials to write or review the title and/or summary, given their importance to a ballot measure.

Petition sheets also always include space for signatures. Other requirements may include a legal warning, a statement that the petition circulator is paid, a summary of the proposed measure, the full text of the measure, the county or district where the signature was collected and more.

Who Writes the Title and Summary of Proposed Measures

Seventeen states have at least one government official draft or review the petition title and/or summary, while proponents draft this language in nine states. Details on who or which offices write the title and summary are listed below:

Statutes on Petition Contents

States include a range of requirements for petition contents including legal warnings, serial numbers provided by officials, notarization, date of the election the measure is to be voted upon, the measure’s full text, summary, the district or county where the signature was gathered, if the circulator is paid, fiscal statement abstract, affidavit of circulator, circulator information, rights of the potential signer, names of proponents or proponent organization, statement of the proponent organization and deadline for signatures. Statutes for petition contents for each state:

• Alaska: AS § 15.45.090
• Arizona: A.R.S. § 19-102
• Arkansas: A.C.A. § 7-9-108
• California: Cal.Elec.Code § 9008, 9009, 9012
• Colorado: CRS § 1-40-110, § 1-40-105.5
• Florida: F.S.A. § 106.19, § 100.371, § 120.54
• Idaho: I.C. § 34-1801a, § 34-1804, § 34-1809
• Illinois: ILCS Const. Art. 14, § 3, 10 ILCS 5/28-2
• Maine: 21-A MRSA § 901, 903
• Massachusetts: M.G.L.A. 53 § 22A; M.G.L.A. Const. Amend. Art. 48, Init., Pt. 2, § 3
• Michigan: M.C.L.A. Const. Art. 12, § 2; M.C.L.A. 168.482; 168.544c
• Mississippi: Miss. Code Ann. § 23-17-17; § 23-17-19
• Missouri: V.A.M.S. 116.050; 116.050
• Montana: MCA 13-27-201; 13-27-202; 13-27-204; 13-27-207
• Nebraska: Neb.Rev.St. § 32-1401; § 32-1405; § 32-628; § 32-1403
• Nevada: N.R.S. Const. Art. 19, § 3; N.R.S. 295.055; 295.009
• North Dakota: NDCC, 16.1-01-07; 16.1-01-09
• Ohio: OH Const. Art. II, § 1g; O.R.C. § 3501.38; 3519.05
• Oklahoma: OK Const. Art. 5, § 2; 34 Okl.St.Ann. § 2
• Oregon: O.R.S. § 250.015; § 250.052; § 250.045
• South Dakota: SDCL § 2-1-1.1; § 2-1-1.2; South Dakota Administrative Rules 5:02:08:07
• Utah: U.C.A. 1953 § 20A-7-203
• Washington: RCWA 29A.72.120; 29A.72.110
• Wyoming: W.S.1977 § 22-24-304; § 22-24-310; § 22-24-311

Circulators

Individuals who physically gather signatures are referred to as circulators.

General Requirements

Every state includes requirements for circulators operating in the state. The most common requirements: that they be at least 18 years old, a citizen, a registered voter and/or a resident of the state.

For citation information, please contact the NCSL Elections and Redistricting team.

*While the Colorado residency requirement for circulators was struck down in Independence Institute v. Gessler, the court upheld the requirement that a circulator present to the notary a specific type of identification.
**Residency requirement was struck down by Term Limits Leadership Council v. Clark (1997).

Two states require circulators to attend a training:

• Colorado (C.R.S. § 1-40-112; § 1-40-135)
• Oregon (OR Rev. Stat. § 250.048)

Affidavits or Sworn Oaths

Twenty-two states require circulators or proponents to sign affidavits or other sworn statements as to the accuracy or authenticity of the petitions:

• Alaska (AS § 15.45.130)
• Arizona (A.R.S. § 19-118; § 19-121)
• Arkansas (Arkansas Const. Art. 5  § 1)
• California (Elections Code §§ 104, 9022)
• Colorado (C.R.S. § 1-40-111)
• Florida (FLA. STAT. 3 § 100.371)
• Idaho (I.C. § 34-1807)
• Illinois (10 ILCS 5/28-3)
• Maine (M.R.S.A. Const. Art. 4, Pt. 3, § 19; 21-A MRSA §903-A, sub-§§4)
• Michigan (M.C.L.A. 168.482, 168.544c)
• Missouri (V.A.M.S. § 116.080)
• Montana (MCA § 13-27-302)
• Nebraska (Neb. Rev. St. § 32-628; § 32-1546)
• Nevada (N.R.S. Const. Art. 19, § 3; Nev. Rev. Stat. § 295.0575)
• North Dakota (NDCC Const. Art. 3, § 3; NDCC, 16.1-01-09)
• Ohio (O.R.C. § 3501.38)
• Oklahoma (34 Okl.St.Ann. § 6)
• Oregon (O.R.S. § 250.045)
• South Dakota (DCL § 2-1-1.2)
• Utah (U.C.A. 1953 § 20A-7-203)
• Washington (RCWA 29A.72.010; 29A.72.120)
• Wyoming (W.S.1977 § 22-24-314)

Several of these states require such information to be included on the signature petition sheets.  

Paying Circulators

Several states have or had statutory bans on paying circulators either per signature or in general. Most of these bans have been overturned by the courts.

Furthermore, statutes allowing or requiring paying per signature have been overturned by the courts. There has been one exception: The case Initiative and Referendum Institute v. Jaeger (2001) in North Dakota upheld the ban on paying per signature.

South Dakota has a unique statute regarding pay: may pay based on hourly wage or salary, express or implied minimum signature requirements for the circulator to meet, may terminate someone's employment if they do not meet "certain productivity requirements," and may pay “discretionary bonuses based on reliability, longevity, and productivity.” (SDCL § 12-13-28)

Signatures

All citizen initiatives require the collection of a certain number of signatures, although states vary in the number of signatures and the baseline used to determine that number. Some states also include signatures to be gathered from across the state, although some of these requirements have been found to be unconstitutional. Every state also includes requirements as to how the authenticity of signatures are verified, and constitutional amendments often require more signatures than statutory changes.

Some states have what's called an indirect initiative process. In these states, sponsors gather a smaller number of signatures to reach the first stage of qualification and, once enough valid signatures are gathered to meet this threshold, the initiative goes before the state legislature. If the legislature enacts the proposal, no further petition takes place and the proposal becomes law. If the legislature fails to enact the proposal as written, sponsors then go through a second stage of signature gathering. Massachusetts, Ohio and Utah use this sort of process.

Missouri and Nebraska have unique signature requirements. In Missouri, signature requirements are based entirely on congressional districts. The requirement states that a petition must garner valid signatures from six of the state's nine congressional districts that equal 5 % (for a statutory proposal) or 8% (for a constitutional proposal) of the votes cast for governor in that district in the last election. That means the total number of signatures required for ballot access will vary depending upon which congressional districts sponsors put together to reach the total of six .

In Nebraska, the total number of signatures is based upon the total number of registered voters in the state. Since the total number of registered voters is constantly changing, with new voters being added and ineligible voters being removed, that presents a dilemma for the state. The state must essentially pick a point in time at which to capture a snapshot of the total number of registered voters.

Number of Signatures Required

* See also: 2011 N.D. Op.Atty.Gen. No. L-04, 2011 WL 1130010 (July 5, 2011)

Geographic Requirements

To make it more difficult to place initiatives on the ballot and to ensure initiatives do not represent just the interests of heavily populated areas, some states have created a requirement that signatures be gathered from across the state. The criteria for these requirements vary wildly. Some have been found to be unconstitutional, largely on “one person, one vote” grounds. States with geographic requirements using entities that are unequal in population, such as counties or even state legislative districts, are more likely to have the requirement challenged in court (for example, see Montana). Geographic entities based on U.S. House districts, which are required to be highly equal in population, have been ruled to be constitutional (for example, see Nevada). Ten states do not have a geographic requirement; 14 states do.

* Under court challenge.

Verification

States vary a great deal in how they verify collected signatures. States such as Alaska (AS § 15.45.150); Idaho (I.C. § 34-1813); and Maine (21-A M.R.S.A. § 902) concisely require the counting and verification of signatures, without detailed guidance.

Most state statutes include some type of sampling, such as in the cases of Arizona (A.R.S. § 19-121.01); California (Elections Code § 9030); and Colorado (C.R.S. § 1-40-116).

Withdrawal of a Signature

Nine states do not include a process in statute for an individual to withdraw his or her signature. Most states only allow an individual to withdraw a signature before the official filing of the petitions. There are exceptions, such as in Mississippi, where someone can withdraw a signature if it was signed as a result of fraud, coercion, or being intentional mislead as to the substance or effect of the petition (Miss. Code § 23-17-60). Formal processes vary greatly, such as the requirement of a formal sworn statement in Missouri (V.A.M.S. § 116.110) to the simple crossing out of one’s name in Idaho (I.C. § 34-1803B).

Submission Timelines

Indirect initiatives can require two rounds of signature gathering, so timelines and deadlines for these are more complex. In three states (Massachusetts, Ohio and Utah), proponents must gather additional signatures to place the measure on the ballot after the first round. In the others, the measure goes directly to the ballot after it is submitted to the legislature. Each state has a unique way of handling the timeline and deadline for signature gathering.

Timeline and Submission Deadlines for Collecting Signatures

Petition Review, Creation and Public Notice

Some states offer no assistance or advice to initiative proponents on the draft of their proposed law. And, in some states, the review is purely technical; the proposal is reviewed to ensure it meets the legal requirements for format and style and adheres to drafting conventions. However, in about half of the 24 initiative states, proponents can get drafting assistance to improve the quality and consistency of initiative proposals. In these states, sponsors may take a draft, or even just an idea, to a legislative office for assistance with the form and content of the initiative before submitting the proposal to the appropriate state official.

States also have varying processes for reviewing petitions. Fiscal statements are the most common type of review, giving estimates and analysis on the likely fiscal impact the proposed measure will have on the state. Other types of review might include recommendations on wording. And many states include some type of public review or notice of proposed measures, as well.

For indirect initiative states, this review process involves the legislature and can be quite extensive.

Fiscal Analysis and General Reviews

Eighteen states require or provide for fiscal statements:

Six states do not require fiscal statements: Arkansas, Idaho, Illinois, Michigan, Nebraska and Oklahoma.

Every state requires or offers some type of review in addition to fiscal statements. Details:

• Alaska: Lieutenant governor reviews within 60 days of receiving (AS § 15.45.150).
• Arizona: Proponents may submit proposed bill to the director of the legislative council for review. After chance for comment by all legislators, the legislative council prepares an impartial analysis with description, background information and likely effects (A.R.S. § 19-111; § 19-124).
• Arkansas: Exact petition copy filed with secretary of state (A.C.A. § 7-9-104; § A.C.A. § 7-9-107).
• California: Proponents may request review by secretary of state and from the Office of Legislative Council. Legislature may hold public hearings and must hold a committee hearing once 25 percent of signatures are collected (Cal.Gov.Code § 12172; 10243; 12172; Cal.Elec.Code § 9007; 9034).
• Colorado: Upon request, any agency in the executive department shall assist in reviewing and preparing comments on the petition. Nonpartisan staff of general assembly prepare summary, analysis and fiscal review (C.R.S.A. Const. Art. 5, § 1; C.R.S.A. § 1-40-105).
• Florida: Attorney general can request advisory opinion on the constitutionality of a measure from the state supreme court. The Financial Impact Estimating Conference members of one person from the governor’s office, the coordinator of the Office of Economic and Demographic Research, one professional senate staffer and one professional house staffer (F.S.A. § 100.371; § 16.061).
• Idaho: Within 20 days after initial petition filing, attorney general reviews and recommends revisions in an advisory capacity.
• Illinois: For accuracy and fairness, the attorney general may rewrite arguments for or against prepared by legislature. General assembly members opposing the amendment may prepare or designate others to prepare a brief argument against such amendment, submitted to attorney general (5 ILCS 20/2).
• Maine: Secretary of state, along with revisor of statutes, may reject petition application if it does not conform to drafting conventions for statutes. Attorney general aids summary. A petition for direct initiative that is approved by the secretary of state and submitted to the legislature must be afforded a public hearing conducted by the joint standing committee that has jurisdiction over the subject matter. The requirement may be waived by a two-thirds vote in each house of the legislature. (21-A M.R.S.A. § 901 and 1 M.R.S.A. § 353, 354).
• Massachusetts: Proponents may alter the measure in small ways after legislature reviews it. Pamphlet contains one-sentence statements describing the effect of a yes or no vote prepared jointly by the attorney general and the state secretary. Legislature reviews the measure as submitted to it by the proponents. The measure can be amended by a three-fourths vote in a joint session. An amendment requires at least one-fourth of members’ support to get onto the ballot. The legislature may submit a competing measure to the ballot (M.G.L.A. Constitution 48, Init., Pt. 2, § 3; Const. 48, Init., Pt. 5, § 2; Constitution 48, Init., Pt. 4, § 3; Constitution 48, Init., Pt. 2, § 4, Pt. 3, § 1; Constitution 48, Init., Pt. 4, § 5; M.G.L.A. 54 § 53).
• Michigan: The director of elections, with the approval of the board of canvassers, prepares a statement of designation for the ballot. For indirect statute petitions, the legislature has 40 session days to pass or reject the unchanged or unamended measure. They may also submit their own alternative ballot measure to the people if it is different but under the same subject area. If passed by legislature, it is subject to the referendum (M.C.L.A. Const. Art. 2, § 9; M.C.L.A. 168.32).
• Mississippi: Attorney general may confer with proponents and may recommend revisions. Since the process is an indirect initiative, the legislature has four months to adopt the unchanged constitutional initiative by a majority in each house before the secretary of state submits it to the people. Otherwise, they may submit an alternative measure. Either way, the measure is put before the people (MS Const. Art. 15, § 273; Miss. Code Ann. § 23-17-5).
• Missouri: The secretary of State will furnish ballot statements explaining the effects of a no or yes vote for the measure, which will include whether it will increase, decrease or maintain taxes. After certification for the ballot, the joint committee on legislative research holds a public hearing in Jefferson City to take public comments regarding the measure (V.A.M.S. 116.153; 116.025).
• Montana: Reviews done by attorney general and legislative services division. There must also be a five-person committee of those who favor rejection, comprised of individuals appointed by the governor, attorney general, president of the senate and speaker of the house—the fifth member is appointed by the four previous members. And attorney general reviews legality (MCA 13-27-202; 13-27-312; 13-27-402).
• Nebraska: The revisor of statutes reviews and recommends revisions with respect to form and draftsmanship. These may be accepted or rejected. The secretary of state writes arguments for and against the measure with information provided by proponents and opponents (Neb.Rev.St. § 32-1405.01; § 32-1405).
• Nevada: The secretary of state will appoint two, three-person committees, one for and one against the measure. The committees select a chair and may prepare arguments and rebuttals, which will be reviewed by the secretary of state for the ballot. The secretary of state consults with the legislative counsel for any technical suggestions, which will be posted to the secretary's website. The legislature has 40 days to pass the unchanged initiative. If the legislature rejects the measure, the legislature may propose an alternative measure (with the approval of the governor), and it will appear on the ballot along with the original initiative. A legislature committee also reviews the measure by a deadline (N.R.S. Const. Art. 19, § 2; N.R.S. 218D.810; 293.267; 295.015; 293.252).
• North Dakota: The secretary of state reviews and if the office deems it insufficient, the committee of petitioners has 20 days to correct it. An estimated fiscal impact statement must be printed with any constitutional amendment or initiated or referred measure on the ballot. (NDCC Const. Art. 3, § 6; NDCC 16.1-06-09; and NDCC 16.1-01-17).
• Ohio: Reviewed by attorney general and Ohio ballot board, which also writes pro or con statements if not supplied. Legislature reviews the indirect statutory initiatives. The legislature has four months to pass the bill in amended or unchanged form. If amended, expired or rejected, it goes onto the ballot. Additional signatures are needed then. If legislature amends, it does not go into effect until the original is rejected by the voters. The president of the Senate and the speaker of the House of Representatives have authority to designate groups of members to prepare arguments for and against amendments to the Ohio Constitution proposed by the General Assembly, a person or persons to prepare an argument for any law, section, or item submitted to the electors by referendum petition, and a person or persons to prepare an argument against any constitutional amendment proposed by initiative petition. (OH Const. Art. II, § 1b; Art. II, § 1g; O.R.C. § 3519.03; 3519.01; 3519.062; 3505.063).
• Oklahoma: Secretary of state reviews and processes the petition, along with the attorney general and the supreme court. The public may protest as to the constitutionality of the measure. The attorney general reviews the ballot title after signed petitions are turned in (34 Okl.St.Ann. § 8).
• Oregon: The Citizens' Initiative Review Commission reviews measures and may create a citizen panel to review specific items. The attorney general submits a draft ballot title and the public may submit written comments in regard to it, which the attorney general may use to revise the title (O.R.S. § 250.137; § 250.139; § 250.125; § 250.067; § 250.127).
• South Dakota: The Legislative Research Council provides written comments to the attorney general (SDCL § 12-13-25; § 12-13-25.1).
• Utah: For indirect initiatives, the legislature may make technical changes only, and prepare a legislative review note and a legislative fiscal note on the law proposed by the initiative petition. Then, the legislature rejects or accepts the proposition unchanged. After the hearings, the proponents and Governor's Office of Management and Budget may revise (U.C.A. 1953 § 20A-7-204.1; § 20A-7-208; § 20A-7-702).
• Washington: Code reviser or assistant code reviser reviews the proposal of the initial petition and recommends revisions or alterations in an advisory capacity only. Attorney general prepares explanatory statements. Arguments for and against are prepared by committees with members appointed first by the secretary of state, the senate's presiding office, and the house's presiding officer. Code reviser issues certificate of review (RCWA 29A.72.020; 29A.32.040; 29A.32.060).
• Wyoming: Upon request, the legislative service office or any agency in the executive department shall render assistance in reviewing and preparing comments on the proposed bill. The attorney general may determine an act of the legislature is the same as a proposed law and will remove it from appearing on the ballot (W.S.1977 § 22-24-304; § 22-24-319).

Public Review and Notices

Every initiative state requires some form of public notice.

Thirteen states require a voter pamphlet or booklet, usually mailed to every voter or household: Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah and Washington.

Thirteen states require publication in a newspaper: Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma and Utah.

These requirements vary widely, most often including newspaper publication, other public displays such as posting on the internet, or public comment periods.

Public notice requirements are found in the following statutes. Only one state does not require this type of action:

• Alaska: AS § 15.45.195; § 15.45.200
• Arizona: A.R.S. § 19-123 and A.R.S. Const. Art. 21 § 1
• Arkansas: Ark. Const. Art. 5, § 1
• California: Cal.Elec.Code § 9002
• Colorado: C.R.S.A. Const. Art. 5, § 1; C.R.S.A. §1-40-102, § 1-40-105, § 1-40-106
• Florida: F.S.A. § 100.371, § 101.161; F.S.A. Const. Art. 11 § 5
• Idaho: I.C. § 34-1812a, § 34-1812b, I.C. § 34-1812c
• Illinois: 5 ILCS 20/2
• Maine: 21-A M.R.S.A. 905 and 1 M.R.S.A. § 354
• Massachusetts: M.G.L.A. 54 § 53
• Michigan: M.C.L.A. Const. Art. 12, § 2; M.C.L.A. 168.22e; 168.476; 168.477; 168.480
• Mississippi: Miss. Code Ann. § 23-17-45
• Missouri: V.A.M.S. 116.334; 116.260
• Montana: MCA 13-27-401; 13-27-402; 13-27-410; 13-27-311
• Nebraska: Neb. Rev. St. § 32-1405.01; § 32-1405.02; § 32-1413
• Nevada: N.R.S. 295.015
• North Dakota: NDCC, § 16.1-01-07
• Ohio: OH Const. Art. II, § 1g; Art. XVI, § 1; O.R.C. § 3519.07
• Oklahoma: 34 Okl.St.Ann. § 8; § 17
• Oregon: O.R.S. § 250.125; § 250.067; § 250.127
• South Dakota: SDCL § 12-13-23
• Utah: U.C.A. 1953 § 20A-7-702; § 20A-7-204.1; § 20A-7-701-706
• Washington: RCWA 29A.32.010; 29A.32.031; 29A.32.040; 29A.32.070; 29A.32.080
• Wyoming: None

Ballot Access and Preparation

Before a measure is placed on a ballot, states decide which election it will appear on, how the ballot title and summary are created and any time restrictions involved. In some states, the legislature or governor may order a special election for a measure.

Which Election and Time Restrictions (If Any)

Ballot Title and Summary

The Election and Effect

The requirements for an election with statewide ballot measures vary greatly by state. States have statutes covering conflicting or competing measures, the percent of the vote needed to pass a measure, and repeal or change restrictions.

Conflicting or Competing Measures

Seventeen states have a statute in place noting that if two or more conflicting measures are on the same ballot, the measure receiving the most votes passes. Additional stipulations:

• Arizona (A.R.S. § 19-126)
• Arkansas (Arkansas Const. Art. 5  § 1; § 7-9-122)
• California (Cal.Const. Art. 2, § 10)
• Colorado (C.R.S.A. § 1-40-123)
• Idaho (I.C. § 34-1811, § 34-1813)
• Maine (M.R.S.A. Const. Art. 4, Pt. 3, § 18)
• Massachusetts (M.G.L.A. Constitution 48, Init., Pt. 4)
• Michigan (M.C.L.A. Const. Art. 2, § 9; Const. Art. 12, § 2)
• Mississippi (MS Const. Art. 15, § 273; Miss. Code Ann. § 23-17-29)
• Missouri (V.A.M.S. Const. Art. 3, § 51; V.A.M.S. 116.320)
• Nebraska (Neb. Rev. St. § 32-1416)
• Nevada (N.R.S. Const. Art. 19, § 2)
• North Dakota (NDCC Const. Art. 3, § 8)
• Ohio (OH Const. Art. II, § 1b)
• Oklahoma (34 Okl.St.Ann. § 21)
• Utah (U.C.A. 1953 § 20A-7-211)
• Washington (RCWA Const. Art. 2, § 1)

In Idaho and Nebraska, the law states that the entire measure might not be superseded and that only conflicting parts of the measure may supersede one another. 

In Maine, Oklahoma and Utah, the law includes additional requirements to those governing conflicting measures:

• Maine: If neither receives a majority, the one receiving the most votes, if it receives more than one-third of the votes given for or against both, will appear at the next statewide election to be held not less than 60 days after the vote (M.R.S.A. Const. Art. 4, Pt. 3, § 18).
• Oklahoma: If neither receives a majority, the one receiving more votes will be resubmitted to the next general election by itself if it received at least one-third of the total votes cast for or against the two measures. If both are approved, the one receiving the greatest number of affirmative votes prevails (34 Okl.St.Ann. § 21).
• Utah: The governor must decide that two measures are in conflict (U.C.A. 1953 § 20A-7-211).

In Alaska, if the lieutenant governor and the attorney general determine an act of the legislature is the same as the proposed measure, then the citizen initiative is voided (AS § 15.45.210).

Six states do not have a law governing conflicting measures: Florida, Illinois, Montana, Oregon, South Dakota and Wyoming.

Majority to Pass?

Thirteen states require a simple majority to pass statewide ballot measures: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Idaho, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma and South Dakota.  

Special rules apply to 11 states:

Colorado and Nevada require a simple majority for statutory measures only.

Colorado and Florida require a supermajority to pass a constitutional amendment: 55 percent of voters in Colorado (C.R.S.A. Const. Art. 5, § 1), and 60 percent of voters in Florida (F.S.A. Const. Art. 11 § 5).

In Nevada, a constitutional amendment needs only a majority but must be approved in two consecutive elections (N.R.S. Const. Art. 19, § 2).

Illinois requires either 60 percent of those voting on the amendment itself or a majority of those voting in the election as a whole (ILCS Const. Art. 14, § 3).

Oregon requires the election as a whole to have had at least 50 percent voter turnout, but only requires a majority to pass (OR Rev. Stat. § 250.036; OR CONST Art. XVII, § 1; Art. IV, § 1).

Two states require supermajorities for laws that seek to alter specific topics.

• Utah requires 60 percent approval for laws that alter hunting and fishing (See Utah Const. Art. 6, Sec. 1, Part 2).
• Washington requires 60 percent approval for laws authorizing gambling or lotteries (Washington Const. Art. 2, Sec. 24).

Four states require measures to pass with a majority of voters, but the measures must also have been voted upon by a certain percentage of the total number of voters who voted in that election. This ensures that measures will not be passed by a small minority of voters, either because of a low turnout or ballot-drop off (where voters only vote partway through a ballot).

• Thirty percent in Massachusetts (Massachusetts Constitution 48, Init., Pt. 4, § 5)
• Forty percent in Mississippi (MS Const. Art. 15, § 273 and Miss. Code § 23-17-37)
• Thirty-five percent in Nebraska (Ne.Rev.St. CONST. Art. III, § 4)
• Fifty percent in Wyoming (W.S.1977 § 22-2-117).

Repeal or Change Restrictions

States have rules in place to govern what legislatures or governors can do to citizen initiatives once they pass. In every state, a constitutional amendment requires a vote of approval. Therefore, rules restricting the ability to change or repeal measures apply to statutory measures, which are available in 21 states.

Ten states allow the legislature to alter or change measures without any time limits or supermajority requirements:

• Colorado (C.R.S.A. Const. Art. 5, § 1)
• Idaho (I.C. § 34-18)
• Maine (M.R.S.A. Const. Art. 4, Pt. 3)
• Massachusetts (M.G.L.A. Const. Amend. Art. 48)
• Missouri (V.A.M.S. Const. Art. 3, § 52)
• Montana (MT CONST Art. 4, § 8)
• Ohio (OH Const. Art. II, § 1g)
• Oklahoma (OK Const. Art. 5, § 7)
• South Dakota (Const. Art. 3, § 1; Art. 13, § 1)
• Utah (U.C.A. 1953 § 20A-7-212)

Seven states have supermajority requirements for changing a measure (the other states require only a regular majority, although some enforce a time period).

Five states have time limits on the repeal or alteration of measures.

In California (Cal.Const. Art. 2, § 10), the legislature cannot change or alter measures on its own and must resubmit changes to the people unless the original measure passed by voters waived this requirement.

What increases voter turnout in an election quizlet?

Which type of election has the highest voter turnout quizlet?

Which of the following is a reason why voter turnout is usually low when Texans vote on proposed constitutional amendments quizlet?

Why is voter turnout so low suggest at least three ways of increasing it quizlet?