• Mission & Governance
• Services Overview
• How to Get Involved
• Standing Committees
• NCSL Foundation

• Issue Areas: A-Z
• State-Federal Relations
• NCSL Standing Committees
• News from D.C. and the States

• About State Legislatures
• Elections, Campaigns & Redistricting
• NCSL's StateConnect Directory
• Web Sites

• Online Guide to NCSL Services
• Staff Sections and Networks
• Meetings & Professional Development
• Staff Directories

• Meetings Calendar
• Online Registration
• Meetings Home Page
• Legislative Summit

• Bookstore
• State Legislatures Magazine
• NCSL's StateConnect Directory

Initiatives on elections-related issues aren't new - it was thanks to the initiative that voters became familiar with campaign finance reform and term limits in the 1990s. This year, those long-time darlings of the initiative process barely make an appearance, while other election issues will appear on ballots across the country - initiative and referendum reform, election day registration, judicial elections, the Electoral College and voter rights.

Voters will decide on a wide array of election reform questions this year - 18 states will consider a total of 25 election-related measures on November 5. Eight of the measures are citizen initiatives, two are popular referenda, and the remaining 15 were referred to the ballot by legislatures.

Election reform is a common subject of the initiative. Election measures in recent years have focused on term limits, campaign finance reform, voter rights, and the initiative process.

• 2000: 30 election-related measures on the ballot in 16 states. Nine were initiatives.
• 1998: 36 election-related measures in 23 states. Fourteen were initiatives.
• 1996: 60 election-related measures in 26 states. Thirty-one were initiatives, many of which addressed term limits and campaign finance reform.
• 1994: 30 election-related measures in 15 of the 24 I&R states (no data on the remaining 26 states).
• 1992: 23 election-related measures in 15 of the 24 I&R states (no data on the remaining 26 states).
• 1990: 13 election-related measures in eight of the 24 I&R states (no data on the remaining 26 states).

Skip to a list of all election measures on the 2002 ballot.

Voters in Florida (Amendment 2), Montana (Amendments 37 and 38), Oklahoma (Question 698) and Oregon (Measure 26) will be asked to reform their state's initiative process.

Florida's measure was referred to the ballot by the legislature and would require that all constitutional amendments appearing on the ballot be accompanied by an economic impact statement. Half of the 24 I&R states have similar requirements for all initiatives that qualify for the ballot.

The Oklahoma proposal would raise the signature threshold for animal-related initiatives to 15%. Under present law, statutory initiatives must have signatures equal in number to 8% of the votes cast for the office receiving the most votes in the last election. The percentage for constitutional initiatives is 15%. If Question 698, a legislative referendum, passes, statutory measures dealing with hunting, fishing, trapping, occupations dealing with animals, and sporting or entertainment events dealing with animals will face the same signature requirements as constitutional initiatives. Other states that have considered similar measures in recent years include Alaska (Measure 1, 2000 failed), Arizona (Proposition 102, 2000, failed), and Utah (Proposition 5, 1998, Passed).

Montana's two measures also deal with the signature requirements for initiatives. Under current law, initiative proponents must gather the signatures of 5% of the qualified electors of the state to qualify a statutory initiative, and 10% for a constitutional initiative. Both also require a geographic distribution - for a statutory initiative, the signatures must come from 34 of the state's 100 legislative districts; for a constitutional initiative, they must come from 40 of the districts. The two proposals on this year's ballot would change the geographic distribution requirements so that the signatures on any initiative petition must come from half of the state's counties. It would also base the required number of signatures on the total vote cast for governor in each county in the last election. Wyoming voted in 1998 to change their signature-gathering requirements (Amendment B). Before the passage of Amendment B, an initiative petition had to be signed by at least one qualified voter in each of at least two-thirds of the state's counties. Amendment B increased that to require the signatures of 15% of the qualified voters of the county in each of at least two-thirds of the counties.

Oregon's Measure 26, an initiative, would prohibit initiative proponents from paying their petitioners on a per-signature basis. They would still be permitted to pay petitioners an hourly wage or salary. The measure is supported by public employee unions in Oregon, who say the change would reduce fraud. The measure has received considerable attention recently, thanks to a case against Oregon Taxpayers United in which the Oregon Education Association and the Oregon chapter of the American Federation of Teachers alleged the tax group had accepted forged signatures on initiative petitions. A civil jury ordered Oregon Taxpayers United to pay $840,000 in that case.

Election day registration (EDR) is on the ballot in California (Proposition 52) and Colorado (Amendment 30). Both measures would permit eligible voters with a valid ID to register at the polls on election day. California's measure increases penalties for voter fraud; Colorado's directs the legislature to enact the necessary laws to prevent voter fraud. Six states currently permit EDR - Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Wisconsin and Wyoming. Voter turnout is typically 10 to 17 percent higher than the national average in those states. Opponents argue that EDR makes voter fraud easier and increases the cost of elections. While Colorado's proposal doesn't have a specific estimate of costs attached, California's legislative analyst estimates EDR would cost $6 million per year.

Campaign finance reform (CFR) was one of the biggest subjects of the initiative in the 1990s. From 1990 to 2000, voters considered 29 CFR measures, 19 of which were adopted. CFR appeared to decline in popularity in 2000, however, with just five measures on the ballot and only one passing. This year, there are just two states considering campaign finance measures - Colorado (Amendment 27) and Massachusetts (Question 3).

The Massachusetts measure is a non-binding advisory question placed on the ballot by the legislature. It asks voters if they want to keep a public-financing measure passed in 1998. The legislature has been reluctant to appropriate the funding necessary to make the 1998 program fully functional.

Colorado's Amendment 27 is very similar to the campaign finance measure voters passed there in 1996. Both measures focus on very low limits on contributions by individuals to candidates (ranging from $200 - $500 per election cycle), limits on party contributions to candidates (currently not limited in Colorado law), and a prohibition on corporate and union contributions. Amendment 27 also requires more disclosure by groups airing election ads, and establishes voluntary expenditure limits.

Parts of the 1996 measure, Amendment 15, were struck down by federal courts, and the legislature made significant amendments to the portions remaining. This year's measure is a constitutional amendment, which would prevent the legislature from amending the law without voter approval.

Colorado Common Cause and the Colorado League of Women Voters sponsored both Amendments 15 and 27.

Term limits is another issue that was popular throughout the 1990s but has started to fade. From 1990 through 2000, there were 61 statewide votes on term limits. Just eleven failed to pass. The term limits movement has clearly run out of steam, however, and this year's crop of term limits ballot measures reflects that trend. All three deal with rolling back existing term limits.

The most controversial term limits vote this year will be in Idaho (Proposition 2). Voters there will consider a popular referendum to reinstate term limits. The legislature repealed Idaho's term limits earlier this year, and angry term limits proponents gathered enough signatures to demand a popular vote on the legislature's move. For more information, visit the Idaho Statesman's special section devoted to the term limits battle.

Voters in Colorado will decide on a legislative referendum (Referendum A) to exempt district attorneys from term limits. Missouri voters will consider whether partial terms should be excluded from term limits (Amendment 3).

Click here to visit NCSL's term limits web site.

Several states have votes on judicial elections this year. Legislatures in Mississippi (Amendment 1) and Nevada (Question 6) are asking voters to increase the length of judges' terms. There are two initiatives on Oregon's ballot - Measure 21 would revise procedures for electing judges and filling judicial vacancies, and Measure 22 would require that certain judges be elected by district.

Voter Rights

In Arkansas, voters will consider repealing a provision of the constitution that requires ballots to be numbered and the numbers to be recorded next to voters' names in pollbooks. If Amendment 1 passes, Arkansas voters would gain the right to cast a secret ballot.

Amendment 2 in New Mexico would remove from the constitution language prohibiting the mentally ill from voting.

A popular referendum in Michigan would repeal the major election reform bill passed by the legislature in 2001. Supporters of Proposal 02-1 want to make sure Michigan voters can still vote a straight ticket; however, the bill it seeks to repeal, P.A. 269 of 2001, is a much broader election reform measure. It included provisions addressing training of election officials, provisional voting, an expedited canvass if presidential vote differential is under 25,000, requiring that ballot counting equipment screen ballots for voting errors to ensure the accurate tabulation of absentee ballots, permitting voters to correct errors, and penalties for stealing campaign signs or accepting payment for campaign work while being paid as a public employee to perform election duties. If Michigan votes "no" on Proposal 02-1, none of the aforementioned provisions of P.A. 269 will take effect.

The Wyoming legislature referred Amendment B to the ballot, asking voters to approve a plan that would allow the legislature to resolve a dispute or challenge to determine the presidential electors. North Carolina and Texas passed similar measures in 2001.

Key to measure types:

 For more information on Initiative and Referendum - please contact Jennie Drage Bowser elections-info@ncsl.org.