Thread Five
We've now reached thread number six, and the first one to be entirely disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Even as this disease bleeds into all other matters, life, and the 2020 US Election, goes on. Even as more primaries are either delayed or switched to mail-in only ballots, former VP Joe Biden is looking for a running mate and has made it clear that he's going to choose a women. As to who that woman will be, we still don't really have it narrowed down yet, but in a month or two we'll have a better idea if we're not all mad with cabin fever by then.
In the meantime, there will still, eventually be primaries down ballot, lots of news, and lots of things to discuss as we all remain indoors and slowly go insane from watching 500 consecutive hours of Hulu. So, discuss the election, play by the rules, stew at each other if you have to, but don't forget to wash your hands often.
Here's something else you can view. A lot of people are asking what states have special elections for Senate vacancies, so here's a handy guide: https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/vacancies-in-the-united-states-senate.aspx
Plebiscite Plaza 2020:
Our first initiative, Amendment 1, will be voted on on Primary Day, March 3(Super Tuesday). It's a constitutional amendment to change the name of the State Board of Education to the State Commission on Primary and Secondary Education. It would also change its eight-member makeup from being completely elected to being completely appointed by the Governor. REJECTED
On to November with our next amendments. The next amendment would lead to sweeping reforms in the state's judicial system starting with taking away the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court's job to appoint the Administrative Director of Courts(the executive in charge of the state's court system) and transferring that power to the Supreme Court as a whole. Second, it would take away the legislature's right to impeach judges and place disciplinary action in the hands of the Court of Judiciary(the state court that handle judicial complaints) and the Judicial Inquiry Commission. Third, it would give the JIC, by a 2/3 majority, the right to suspend judges, which can only currently occur when the JIC hands a case over to the Court of Judiciary. Fourth, it would increase the JIC from 9 to 11 members. Fifth, it would shrink the Court of the Judiciary from nine to eight members and how it's set up. Sixth, it would allow counties to make changes to their judiciaries by county constitutional amendments(which now only require the county itself to approve). And seventh, it would require the State Supreme Court to issue an opinion if the legislature wishes to change judicial district boundaries. A lot to take in, I know.
Our next amendment would authorise the state legislature to recompile the notoriously massive state constitution during the 2022 session by removing racist language, arranging the state section into proper articles and sections, consolidate economic development clauses, and arrange all country amendments by county in alphabetical order.
The next amendment would change language concerning who can vote from "every citizen" to "only a citizen." These amendments tend to pass easily.
Finally, an amendment would allow district or circuit judges appointed to fill vacancies to serve until the next election after at least two years following their appointment, as opposed to the current one year limit.
On to November with our next amendments. The next amendment would lead to sweeping reforms in the state's judicial system starting with taking away the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court's job to appoint the Administrative Director of Courts(the executive in charge of the state's court system) and transferring that power to the Supreme Court as a whole. Second, it would take away the legislature's right to impeach judges and place disciplinary action in the hands of the Court of Judiciary(the state court that handle judicial complaints) and the Judicial Inquiry Commission. Third, it would give the JIC, by a 2/3 majority, the right to suspend judges, which can only currently occur when the JIC hands a case over to the Court of Judiciary. Fourth, it would increase the JIC from 9 to 11 members. Fifth, it would shrink the Court of the Judiciary from nine to eight members and how it's set up. Sixth, it would allow counties to make changes to their judiciaries by county constitutional amendments(which now only require the county itself to approve). And seventh, it would require the State Supreme Court to issue an opinion if the legislature wishes to change judicial district boundaries. A lot to take in, I know.
Our next amendment would authorise the state legislature to recompile the notoriously massive state constitution during the 2022 session by removing racist language, arranging the state section into proper articles and sections, consolidate economic development clauses, and arrange all country amendments by county in alphabetical order.
The next amendment would change language concerning who can vote from "every citizen" to "only a citizen." These amendments tend to pass easily.
Finally, an amendment would allow district or circuit judges appointed to fill vacancies to serve until the next election after at least two years following their appointment, as opposed to the current one year limit.
Alaskans will be voting on electoral reform this year. First, partisan primaries would be abolished and replaced with a top-four jungle primary where the top four candidates go to the general. Second, the general election would be switched to RCV, and voters would have to rank all four candidates. Third, all people and entities who make campaign donations that were themselves originally gifts to that person would be required to disclose that donation's true source(who gave the gift initially). Basically, it's a way to require people who work via SuperPACs to disclose the people behind them.
Another measure would raise taxes on oil production for the three largest oil fields in the North Slope. There would be two new taxes imposed, and they would have to pay whichever is higher. First, an alternative gross minimum tax of 10% gross value when oil prices are below $50 a barrel. As the price goes up, so does the percentage, a 1% increase every $5 until maxing out at 15%($70 a barrel). Second, an additional production tax calculated by subtracting the difference of the average production tax value of oil each month and $50, then multiplying it by how much oil the company produced that month, then adding another 15%. Whichever one of these two is higher in each field at any given month is the tax they would have to pay.
Another measure would raise taxes on oil production for the three largest oil fields in the North Slope. There would be two new taxes imposed, and they would have to pay whichever is higher. First, an alternative gross minimum tax of 10% gross value when oil prices are below $50 a barrel. As the price goes up, so does the percentage, a 1% increase every $5 until maxing out at 15%($70 a barrel). Second, an additional production tax calculated by subtracting the difference of the average production tax value of oil each month and $50, then multiplying it by how much oil the company produced that month, then adding another 15%. Whichever one of these two is higher in each field at any given month is the tax they would have to pay.
Back in 2012, Arkansas voters passed Issue 1, a temporary 0.5% sales tax with proceeds going to transportation funding. This is set to sunset in 2023 when transportation bonds that this tax was meant to pay off are...paid off. However, Arkansas voters will be voting in 2020 on an amendment that would make this sales tax permanent.
The next amendment would change term limits in Arkansas. Currently, there's a 16-year lifetime limit for legislators. The proposed amendment would change it to 12 years with a chance to run again after four years off.
Amendment number three would change how citizen-directed amendments would proceed in the future. It would require petitions to have at least half of the required signatures from 45 counties instead of the current 15, change the petition deadline from early July to January 15, eliminate the current 30-day grace period for additional signatures, limit the time frame for legal challenges to April 15 at the latest, and change the ratification for all amendments from a simple majority of voters to 60%.
Back in March 2019, HB 1251 became law. This law redefined optometry practices to allow optometrists to perform certain surgical procedures such as intraocular injections, removal of low-risk lesions on the eye, and certain laser procedures. This proposal is a veto referendum that would limit such practices to ophthalmologists again. A No vote would equal a veto.
The next amendment would change term limits in Arkansas. Currently, there's a 16-year lifetime limit for legislators. The proposed amendment would change it to 12 years with a chance to run again after four years off.
Amendment number three would change how citizen-directed amendments would proceed in the future. It would require petitions to have at least half of the required signatures from 45 counties instead of the current 15, change the petition deadline from early July to January 15, eliminate the current 30-day grace period for additional signatures, limit the time frame for legal challenges to April 15 at the latest, and change the ratification for all amendments from a simple majority of voters to 60%.
Back in March 2019, HB 1251 became law. This law redefined optometry practices to allow optometrists to perform certain surgical procedures such as intraocular injections, removal of low-risk lesions on the eye, and certain laser procedures. This proposal is a veto referendum that would limit such practices to ophthalmologists again. A No vote would equal a veto.
Prop 13 will be on Super Tuesday, but it's just a bond issue vote.
Come November, the first proposition on the list would bring criminal justice reforms. These would including increasing the number of types of violent offences that restrict early parole to 51 different crimes, change certain types of theft from felonies to wobblers(i.e, it's the judge's discretion as to whether it's a felony or misdemeanour), create new crimes in the form of serial crime and organised retail crime, and require DNA samples for a variety of offences.
The next proposition would amend the constitution to require commercial and industrial properties to be taxed according to their fair market value as opposed to the current system that taxes them based on their purchase price plus 2% inflation each year. It would also require all revenue collected from these taxes to go to local government and schools.
After Prop 10's failure in 2018, its creators are trying again to reform Costa-Hawkins, California's rent control law. Instead of repealing it outright, they now plan to change the operative date on when a property can have rent controls imposed. Instead of only allowing it if it was occupied before February 1, 1995, this would allow it if it was occupied over 15 years from the present day, effectively allowing more rent controls as time progresses. There would be exemptions on people who own no more than two homes with distinct titles. It would also end vacancy decontrol practices by requiring landlords to limit rent increases to 15% for the first three years following a vacancy.
Voters will be deciding another real estate redux as well: A modified version of 2018's defeated Prop 5. It would allow seniors, the severely disabled, and victims of natural disasters or hazardous waste contamination to transfer their tax assessments from their old house to another anywhere in the state(currently anywhere in the same county), and lift the lifetime limit on doing this to three times(currently just once). Prop 5 meant to abolish the limit altogether, but it was defeated. Other measures include changing how properties are transferred within families. They would now be reassessed at market value when transferred to children or grandchildren(currently, values are inherited without changes). Also, this would require a legal entity's property to be reassessed to market value if 90% of that entity's ownership changes hands without any one person or group owning over 50%(currently, reassessment is only required when a single person or group gets 50% or more).
Californians will also be voting on a measure to override AB 5, better known as the Uber Law. AB 5 basically changed the meaning of "independent contractor" in California due to the fact that many of them were, in fact, more dependent on a company like Uber than most independent workers are, which led to them being considered full employees. This has seen a lot of fallout from a lot of similar gig economy-based firms(including the firm I work under) with limits being placed on how much work a person can do. This measure would apply only to app-based drivers, declaring them independent contractors and enact new policies just for them. These policies include an earnings floor of 120% of the state's or municipality's minimum wage and 30 cents a mile, limits to work hours over a 24-hour period, subsidies for healthcare, and insurance for occupational accidents and accidental deaths. Companies would also have to implement anti-discrimination and sexual harassment policies.Background checks would be required, impersonating a driver would become a felony, and localities won't be bale to add their own regulations.
On to the final proposition so far, a veto referendum. Back in 2018, the legislature passed SB 10, which made California the first state to abolish bail altogether. It replaced bail with a risk assessment system that would determine whether a person could be released from pretrial detention. Low risks could be released, medium risks would be at a judge's discretion, and high risks would be remanded. This law ended up being savaged by the ACLU and Human Rights Watch, not to mention bail bondsmen across the state, because there were considered to be too many issues with possible racial disparity and arbitrary decisions. This proposition would decide whether or not SB 10 would be upheld, with a "No" vote meaning a repeal.
Come November, the first proposition on the list would bring criminal justice reforms. These would including increasing the number of types of violent offences that restrict early parole to 51 different crimes, change certain types of theft from felonies to wobblers(i.e, it's the judge's discretion as to whether it's a felony or misdemeanour), create new crimes in the form of serial crime and organised retail crime, and require DNA samples for a variety of offences.
The next proposition would amend the constitution to require commercial and industrial properties to be taxed according to their fair market value as opposed to the current system that taxes them based on their purchase price plus 2% inflation each year. It would also require all revenue collected from these taxes to go to local government and schools.
After Prop 10's failure in 2018, its creators are trying again to reform Costa-Hawkins, California's rent control law. Instead of repealing it outright, they now plan to change the operative date on when a property can have rent controls imposed. Instead of only allowing it if it was occupied before February 1, 1995, this would allow it if it was occupied over 15 years from the present day, effectively allowing more rent controls as time progresses. There would be exemptions on people who own no more than two homes with distinct titles. It would also end vacancy decontrol practices by requiring landlords to limit rent increases to 15% for the first three years following a vacancy.
Voters will be deciding another real estate redux as well: A modified version of 2018's defeated Prop 5. It would allow seniors, the severely disabled, and victims of natural disasters or hazardous waste contamination to transfer their tax assessments from their old house to another anywhere in the state(currently anywhere in the same county), and lift the lifetime limit on doing this to three times(currently just once). Prop 5 meant to abolish the limit altogether, but it was defeated. Other measures include changing how properties are transferred within families. They would now be reassessed at market value when transferred to children or grandchildren(currently, values are inherited without changes). Also, this would require a legal entity's property to be reassessed to market value if 90% of that entity's ownership changes hands without any one person or group owning over 50%(currently, reassessment is only required when a single person or group gets 50% or more).
Californians will also be voting on a measure to override AB 5, better known as the Uber Law. AB 5 basically changed the meaning of "independent contractor" in California due to the fact that many of them were, in fact, more dependent on a company like Uber than most independent workers are, which led to them being considered full employees. This has seen a lot of fallout from a lot of similar gig economy-based firms(including the firm I work under) with limits being placed on how much work a person can do. This measure would apply only to app-based drivers, declaring them independent contractors and enact new policies just for them. These policies include an earnings floor of 120% of the state's or municipality's minimum wage and 30 cents a mile, limits to work hours over a 24-hour period, subsidies for healthcare, and insurance for occupational accidents and accidental deaths. Companies would also have to implement anti-discrimination and sexual harassment policies.Background checks would be required, impersonating a driver would become a felony, and localities won't be bale to add their own regulations.
On to the final proposition so far, a veto referendum. Back in 2018, the legislature passed SB 10, which made California the first state to abolish bail altogether. It replaced bail with a risk assessment system that would determine whether a person could be released from pretrial detention. Low risks could be released, medium risks would be at a judge's discretion, and high risks would be remanded. This law ended up being savaged by the ACLU and Human Rights Watch, not to mention bail bondsmen across the state, because there were considered to be too many issues with possible racial disparity and arbitrary decisions. This proposition would decide whether or not SB 10 would be upheld, with a "No" vote meaning a repeal.
Our first proposal would amend the constitution to change language, just like Alabama, to say that "only a citizen" rather than "every citizen" can vote.
Proposal number two is a veto vote. At the start of 2019, Colorado's legislature passed SB 42, which brought Colorado into the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. This, once the number of states that top 270 electoral votes is reached, would require Colorado to give their presidential electoral votes to whomever wins the national popular vote. Many people, mostly conservatives, brought up a petition to veto the law, so now it goes to the voters. A "No" vote would lead to SB 42 being repealed.
Proposal number three would require the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission to set up a plan that would see Gray Wolves returned to Colorado, on public lands west of the continental divide, by 2023.
Proposal number two is a veto vote. At the start of 2019, Colorado's legislature passed SB 42, which brought Colorado into the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. This, once the number of states that top 270 electoral votes is reached, would require Colorado to give their presidential electoral votes to whomever wins the national popular vote. Many people, mostly conservatives, brought up a petition to veto the law, so now it goes to the voters. A "No" vote would lead to SB 42 being repealed.
Proposal number three would require the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission to set up a plan that would see Gray Wolves returned to Colorado, on public lands west of the continental divide, by 2023.
Amendment 1 would also change language to "only a citizen". Polls show this passing overwhelmingly, and Florida requires a 55% majority for amendments.
Amendment 2 would increase the state's minimum wage from the current $8.46 an hour to $15 an hour by 2026. This is also expected to pass.
Amendment 3 would create a jungle primary system(top two regardless of party) for Florida's state legislators and executives. Right now, polls are leaning against approval.
Amendment 4 would change the constitution to require all future amendments to be passed at two general elections rather than one in order to be ratified, a practice that's already done by some states. The most recent polls in October show it ahead but not with the 55% needed to ratify.
Amendment 5 would change the constitution to extend the time a person may transfer their Save Our Homes benefits(a constitutional provision that limits property tax valuation increases on homesteads to 3% per year) to three years after they get a new homestead. Currently, the time frame is two years afterwards.
Amendment 6 would amend the constitution to allow homestead property tax discounts to be passed on to the surviving spouse of a deceased veteran.
Amendment 2 would increase the state's minimum wage from the current $8.46 an hour to $15 an hour by 2026. This is also expected to pass.
Amendment 3 would create a jungle primary system(top two regardless of party) for Florida's state legislators and executives. Right now, polls are leaning against approval.
Amendment 4 would change the constitution to require all future amendments to be passed at two general elections rather than one in order to be ratified, a practice that's already done by some states. The most recent polls in October show it ahead but not with the 55% needed to ratify.
Amendment 5 would change the constitution to extend the time a person may transfer their Save Our Homes benefits(a constitutional provision that limits property tax valuation increases on homesteads to 3% per year) to three years after they get a new homestead. Currently, the time frame is two years afterwards.
Amendment 6 would amend the constitution to allow homestead property tax discounts to be passed on to the surviving spouse of a deceased veteran.
Georgians will be voting on an amendment that would allow the legislature to dedicate revenues, taxes, and fees from hazardous and solid waste collection, including the disposal of scrap automobile tires, to the purposes for which the fees were imposed.
This measure would amend the constitution to require that the legislature has 35 districts, which they currently have(Senators get elected in each district, the House elects two from each district). The constitution currently requires between 30-35 districts. I'd say this will pass.
Illinois is voting to amend its constitution to allow for a graduated progressive income tax as opposed to the current requirements for a flat income tax. Polls show it passing with an average of 67%, and we require 60%+1 or an absolute majority of all voters. The tax rates were determined last year and will only go into effect once the amendment passes.
Iowa will be voting, as they must every decade, on whether or not to hold a Constitutional Convention. This isn't likely to pass.
Kentucky will be voting to add Marsy's Law to their constitution...again. They voted for it in 2018, but the Commonwealth Supreme Court struck it down due to what it considered unconstitutional language, so this version is an attempt at fixing that. Like in '18, it'll pass overwhelmingly.
Another measure coming up would amend the Constitution to extend term lengths for certain judicial offices starting in 2022. Circuit clerks and Commonwealth's Attorneys would go up from six-year terms to eight-year terms, county attorneys and district judges would go from four years to eight, and licencing requirements for district attorneys would be renewed every eight years instead of every two years.
Another measure coming up would amend the Constitution to extend term lengths for certain judicial offices starting in 2022. Circuit clerks and Commonwealth's Attorneys would go up from six-year terms to eight-year terms, county attorneys and district judges would go from four years to eight, and licencing requirements for district attorneys would be renewed every eight years instead of every two years.
Louisiana is voting to amend the constitution to say that "nothing in this constitution shall be construed to secure or protect a right to abortion or require the funding of abortion."
Louisiana's second proposed Amendment would require Parishes to take into account how much oil or gas a well produces when levying property taxes, unlike now when they just use the fair market value of the well itself.
Another amendment going before voters would allow the legislature to use up to a third of the state's rainy day fund (Or Budget Stabilisation Fund to use the official name) to cover the state's costs associated with federal disasters and disaster areas.
The next amendment on the agenda would allow local governments to enter cooperative endeavour agreements with new or expanding manufacturers. These agreements can be made when the transfer or sale of public land is in sync with the governmental purpose that the company can legally pursue, when the transfer or sale isn't seen as unnecessarily gratuitous by the city or parish, and when the company can reasonably claim that they'll receive equal or greater benefits than the cost of the sale. If they enter these agreements, then they can make CEA payments to that authority instead of property taxes to the parish.
A fifth amendment would change how the state decides its spending limit. Currently, state expenditures are capped at the previous year's limit multiplied by the average annual percentage change in personal income over the last three years. This amendment would change that cap to one that's at the previous year's limit multiplied by 5% or less.
Another property tax based amendment would expand the state's special homestead exemption. People who earn up to $100,000 a year could now qualify for special homestead assessments, whereas the current income limit is $50,000 a year.
Louisiana's second proposed Amendment would require Parishes to take into account how much oil or gas a well produces when levying property taxes, unlike now when they just use the fair market value of the well itself.
Another amendment going before voters would allow the legislature to use up to a third of the state's rainy day fund (Or Budget Stabilisation Fund to use the official name) to cover the state's costs associated with federal disasters and disaster areas.
The next amendment on the agenda would allow local governments to enter cooperative endeavour agreements with new or expanding manufacturers. These agreements can be made when the transfer or sale of public land is in sync with the governmental purpose that the company can legally pursue, when the transfer or sale isn't seen as unnecessarily gratuitous by the city or parish, and when the company can reasonably claim that they'll receive equal or greater benefits than the cost of the sale. If they enter these agreements, then they can make CEA payments to that authority instead of property taxes to the parish.
A fifth amendment would change how the state decides its spending limit. Currently, state expenditures are capped at the previous year's limit multiplied by the average annual percentage change in personal income over the last three years. This amendment would change that cap to one that's at the previous year's limit multiplied by 5% or less.
Another property tax based amendment would expand the state's special homestead exemption. People who earn up to $100,000 a year could now qualify for special homestead assessments, whereas the current income limit is $50,000 a year.
In May 2019, Maine passed LD 798 into law, which eliminates religious and philosophical exemptions from vaccinations effective September 2021. This, however, was opposed by many, so now the issue will be going up to the voters on Super Tuesday via Question 1. This will likely be a "No" vote to uphold the law. REJECTED, so the law stays in effect.
Maryland will be voting to amend their constitution to allow the legislature to increase, decrease, or add items to the annual budget provided that it doesn't exceed the amount of money that the Governor's proposed. Currently, they're only allowed to cut items from the budget.
Another measure coming up would legalise sports and event betting at certain licenced facilities. All the money would go to public education. It would also authorise the Maryland Department of Transportation, the State Lottery and Gaming Control Commission, and the Attorney General to review a 2017 study concerning disparities in the numbers of women and minorities in the gaming industry and possibly propose remedial solutions.
Another measure coming up would legalise sports and event betting at certain licenced facilities. All the money would go to public education. It would also authorise the Maryland Department of Transportation, the State Lottery and Gaming Control Commission, and the Attorney General to review a 2017 study concerning disparities in the numbers of women and minorities in the gaming industry and possibly propose remedial solutions.
This one would amend the constitution to change how state and local park money can be spent. Projects that would renovate recreational facilities would now be eligible for state grants and at least 25% of all grants would have to go to it, the State Parks Endowments Fund could now be spent on upkeep and maintenance for the parks, and the Natural Resources Trust Fund's cap would be increased from $500 to $800 million.
Initiative 65 would amend the constitution to legalise medical marijuana for people who have one of over 20 different conditions including cancer, HIV/AIDS, or Parkinson's among others. Patients would be able to have up to 2.5 grams worth on them.
Mississippians will also have Alternative 65A to contend with. Mississippi allows the Legislature to pass their own alternative version of initiatives, so they passed this alternative to Initiative 65. Basically, it would also legalise medical marijuana-based products for debilitating conditions, but there would be more stringent regulations limiting their use to terminal patients with debilitating conditions, far fewer than Initiative 65 would allow. Mississippians will have a choice of "Either Measure" or "Neither Measure" on their ballots, and if they vote either, they will get to choose which of these two measures they want.
Mississippians will also have Alternative 65A to contend with. Mississippi allows the Legislature to pass their own alternative version of initiatives, so they passed this alternative to Initiative 65. Basically, it would also legalise medical marijuana-based products for debilitating conditions, but there would be more stringent regulations limiting their use to terminal patients with debilitating conditions, far fewer than Initiative 65 would allow. Mississippians will have a choice of "Either Measure" or "Neither Measure" on their ballots, and if they vote either, they will get to choose which of these two measures they want.
First, we have Amendment 2 coming up on August 4. This would expand Medicaid to ACA levels. Like most states, it's likely to pass.
Amendment 1, coming in November with the other measures on the list, would amend the constitution to limit all executive offices to a term limit of two terms. Currently, only the Governor and State Treasurer are subject to them.
Amendment 3 would effectively alter 2018's Amendment 1 beyond recognition. Lobbyists' gifts would be outright banned instead of capped at $5, the campaign contribution limit for state senate campaigns would be reduced to $2,400 from $2,500, and the nonpartisan state demographer would be dissolved. Redistricting would be returned to the hands of a bipartisan legislative commission, which would now have additional mandates to keep communities, cities, counties(where possible),or neighbourhoods in the same district, requiring districts to have no more than five sides, and requiring districts to be as equal in population as possible within 1% of the state's population average or within 3% if that means communities can stay together. They will also be required to measure partisan fairness, subordinate to the other requirements, and districts would go through simulated elections using the electoral performance index with statewide swings between 1-5%. If a district's "wasted votes", described as votes that either go to perennially losing parties or overwhelming winning parties, go over 15% of the margin of votes in these simulations, the district can be rejected.
Amendment 1, coming in November with the other measures on the list, would amend the constitution to limit all executive offices to a term limit of two terms. Currently, only the Governor and State Treasurer are subject to them.
Amendment 3 would effectively alter 2018's Amendment 1 beyond recognition. Lobbyists' gifts would be outright banned instead of capped at $5, the campaign contribution limit for state senate campaigns would be reduced to $2,400 from $2,500, and the nonpartisan state demographer would be dissolved. Redistricting would be returned to the hands of a bipartisan legislative commission, which would now have additional mandates to keep communities, cities, counties(where possible),or neighbourhoods in the same district, requiring districts to have no more than five sides, and requiring districts to be as equal in population as possible within 1% of the state's population average or within 3% if that means communities can stay together. They will also be required to measure partisan fairness, subordinate to the other requirements, and districts would go through simulated elections using the electoral performance index with statewide swings between 1-5%. If a district's "wasted votes", described as votes that either go to perennially losing parties or overwhelming winning parties, go over 15% of the margin of votes in these simulations, the district can be rejected.
First, we have LR-130. This proposed law would strip local governments of their ability to regulate or restrict concealed weapons.
Next, we have C-46 and C-47. They both do the same thing; enshrining current signature distribution requirements for initiatives into the constitution, 5% in 34 legislative districts for statues or referenda, 10% in 40 districts for amendments. C-46 does it for constitutional amendments while C-47 does it for laws.
Next, we have C-46 and C-47. They both do the same thing; enshrining current signature distribution requirements for initiatives into the constitution, 5% in 34 legislative districts for statues or referenda, 10% in 40 districts for amendments. C-46 does it for constitutional amendments while C-47 does it for laws.
The first proposal is an amendment that would remove the state's exception clause, a provision that allows slavery or indentured servitude for prisoners, from the constitution.
Proposal number 2 is an amendment that would increase the repayment period for TIFs(tax increment financing areas) in areas considered extremely blighted from 15 to 20 years.
Proposal number 2 is an amendment that would increase the repayment period for TIFs(tax increment financing areas) in areas considered extremely blighted from 15 to 20 years.
Question 1 is an amendment that would remove the constitutional status of the Nevada State Board of Regents. This board oversees eight major universities in the state including UNLV, and removing its status would allow the legislature to have more control over higher education in the state. It passed the legislature with wide bipartisan support.
Question 2 would repeal 2002's Question 2, which limits marriage to a man and a woman. A symbolic gesture that nonetheless is a good one for equality, so I think it will pass.
Question 3 is an amendment that would change how the State Board of Pardons Commissioners works. It would require the board, consisting of the Governor, Attorney General, and the seven State Supreme Court Justices, to meet at least four times a year(currently only required by law to meet twice a year), allow any board member to submit an issue for consideration, and make a majority decision sufficient for any measures(currently, it has to be a majority plus the governor).
Question 4 is an amendment that would add the 2002 Declaration of Voter's Rights to the constitution. These rights are the right to vote on a ballot that is written in a clear format and accurately records the person's vote, the right to have questions about voting procedures answered and to have those procedures publicly visible at all polling places, the right to vote without intimidation, the right to vote during an early voting period or on election day if you're in line when the polls close, the right to return and replace spoiled ballots, the right to request assistance in voting if necessary, the right to a sample ballot, the right to instruction on how to use polling equipment, the right to equal access to the voting system, the right to uniform statewide standards for counting ballots, and the right to have complaints about election issues resolved fairly and efficiently.
Finally, there's Question 5. Back in 2018, Nevada voted for Question 6, an amendment that would raise the state's renewable energy requirements to 50% of all energy by 2030. Since this was an initiated amendment, it requires a second vote at the next general election, and this is that vote. I don't think the electorate is likely to change that much by November, so it'll pass again.
Question 2 would repeal 2002's Question 2, which limits marriage to a man and a woman. A symbolic gesture that nonetheless is a good one for equality, so I think it will pass.
Question 3 is an amendment that would change how the State Board of Pardons Commissioners works. It would require the board, consisting of the Governor, Attorney General, and the seven State Supreme Court Justices, to meet at least four times a year(currently only required by law to meet twice a year), allow any board member to submit an issue for consideration, and make a majority decision sufficient for any measures(currently, it has to be a majority plus the governor).
Question 4 is an amendment that would add the 2002 Declaration of Voter's Rights to the constitution. These rights are the right to vote on a ballot that is written in a clear format and accurately records the person's vote, the right to have questions about voting procedures answered and to have those procedures publicly visible at all polling places, the right to vote without intimidation, the right to vote during an early voting period or on election day if you're in line when the polls close, the right to return and replace spoiled ballots, the right to request assistance in voting if necessary, the right to a sample ballot, the right to instruction on how to use polling equipment, the right to equal access to the voting system, the right to uniform statewide standards for counting ballots, and the right to have complaints about election issues resolved fairly and efficiently.
Finally, there's Question 5. Back in 2018, Nevada voted for Question 6, an amendment that would raise the state's renewable energy requirements to 50% of all energy by 2030. Since this was an initiated amendment, it requires a second vote at the next general election, and this is that vote. I don't think the electorate is likely to change that much by November, so it'll pass again.
This measure would amend the constitution to legalise recreational marijuana for everyone over age 21. It'll easily pass.
The next proposal would amend the constitution to expand New Jersey's $250 property tax deduction for veterans to include veterans who didn't serve during wartime. It would also expand the 100% property tax exemption for disabled veterans to include those who served during peacetime and still got their disability as a result of their service. This is likely to pass.
The next proposal would amend the constitution to expand New Jersey's $250 property tax deduction for veterans to include veterans who didn't serve during wartime. It would also expand the 100% property tax exemption for disabled veterans to include those who served during peacetime and still got their disability as a result of their service. This is likely to pass.
New Mexico will be voting on an amendment to change the makeup of the Public Regulation Commission. This commission oversees the regulation of New Mexico's public utilities from water to phones, and it's currently a five-member elected commission. This amendment would change it to a three-member commission appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the State Senate. No more than two members may belong to the same political party, and they would serve up to two six-year terms.
The second proposal for New Mexico voters would amend the constitution to allow the legislature to pass laws that would change the dates of elections for non-statewide(read county) office holders and adjust their terms of office to match those dates. These terms could not be shortened or lengthened by more than two years.
The second proposal for New Mexico voters would amend the constitution to allow the legislature to pass laws that would change the dates of elections for non-statewide(read county) office holders and adjust their terms of office to match those dates. These terms could not be shortened or lengthened by more than two years.
ND's first proposal would amend the constitution to require that initiated constitutional amendments that the people approve be sent to the legislature. If the legislature approves it, then it's ratified, if it doesn't, then the people have to override the legislature at the next general election.
The second proposal would amend the constitution to increase the membership of the State Board of Higher Education to 15 members from the current 8, increase term lengths to six years from the current four, and forbid legislators, state officials, or other state employees from becoming members. It would also require the board to meet once a year and forbid anyone employed by one of the universities that the board oversees from joining the board until they've been out of that job for at least two years.
The second proposal would amend the constitution to increase the membership of the State Board of Higher Education to 15 members from the current 8, increase term lengths to six years from the current four, and forbid legislators, state officials, or other state employees from becoming members. It would also require the board to meet once a year and forbid anyone employed by one of the universities that the board oversees from joining the board until they've been out of that job for at least two years.
SQ 802, which will be voted on on June 30, would amend the constitution to expand the state's Medicaid to ACA limits. As is usual with this question, it's likely to pass.
SQ 814, this time in November, would amend the constitution to cut the state's Tobacco Settlement Endowment Fund appropriations(a fund made in the aftermath of the 1998 master tobacco settlement that's used on public health, education, and anti-smoking measures) from 75% of all settlement money annually to 25%. The relocated money would instead be transferred to a new special fund that would be used to draw down federal matching funds for Oklahoma's Medicaid.
SQ 814, this time in November, would amend the constitution to cut the state's Tobacco Settlement Endowment Fund appropriations(a fund made in the aftermath of the 1998 master tobacco settlement that's used on public health, education, and anti-smoking measures) from 75% of all settlement money annually to 25%. The relocated money would instead be transferred to a new special fund that would be used to draw down federal matching funds for Oklahoma's Medicaid.
The first proposal here would amend the constitution to authorise state and local governments to place restrictions on campaign contributions, require disclosure of contributions and expenditures, and require advertisements to identify the people that fund them. It'll pass and then get struck down.
Proposal number two would increase Oregon's cigarette tax by $2 per pack to $3.33, increase the cigar tax cap to $1 from the current 50 cents, and impose a tax on e-cigs, vapes, etc at 65% of wholesale price. All revenue would go to the Oregon Health Authority. Oregon being the state it is, I'll say this will pass.
Proposal number two would increase Oregon's cigarette tax by $2 per pack to $3.33, increase the cigar tax cap to $1 from the current 50 cents, and impose a tax on e-cigs, vapes, etc at 65% of wholesale price. All revenue would go to the Oregon Health Authority. Oregon being the state it is, I'll say this will pass.
Puerto Ricans will be voting for the sixth time on whether or not the territory should be a state. This time, the ballot will consist of a simple Yes or No on the question with no options for other status changes.
Initiated Measure 26 would legalise medical marijuana for those with chronic or debilitating conditions such as cancer or MS, and it would allow the state's Health Department to add other conditions or diseases.
Next, we have Amendment A. This would amend the constitution to allow for recreational marijuana and require the Legislature to pass medical marijuana and hemp legalisation laws by April 1, 2022.
Third, there's Amendment B. This would legalise sports betting in Deadwood and require tax revenue from it to go to Deadwood's historical preservation and restoration like other forms of gambling.
Next, we have Amendment A. This would amend the constitution to allow for recreational marijuana and require the Legislature to pass medical marijuana and hemp legalisation laws by April 1, 2022.
Third, there's Amendment B. This would legalise sports betting in Deadwood and require tax revenue from it to go to Deadwood's historical preservation and restoration like other forms of gambling.
First, there's an amendment that would specify the circumstances when a municipality can distribute water outside of its city limits or cooperate with other cities or counties to provide water, allowing cities to provide water outside their service area if they have enough to do so.
Amendment number two would make it so certain qualifications for running for office, such as age, would apply at the time of the election as opposed to the time that the office-seeker would be sworn in. This is already the case for executive branch members, and this would just extend that provision to all offices in the state.
Amendment number three, just like in Nebraska, would remove the state's exception clause. Likely to pass.
Amendment number four would make all language in the state constitution gender-neutral.
Amendment number five would amend the constitution to allow the Legislature to set the date for the opening of the new legislative session in a state law at any time in January. Currently, it's constitutionally bound to start on the fourth Monday of the month.
Number six would create a constitutional right to hunt and fish in Utah.
Number seven would amend the constitution to allow the state to use property and income tax revenue to support children and the disabled. Currently, such revenues can only be spent on schools and colleges.
Amendment number two would make it so certain qualifications for running for office, such as age, would apply at the time of the election as opposed to the time that the office-seeker would be sworn in. This is already the case for executive branch members, and this would just extend that provision to all offices in the state.
Amendment number three, just like in Nebraska, would remove the state's exception clause. Likely to pass.
Amendment number four would make all language in the state constitution gender-neutral.
Amendment number five would amend the constitution to allow the Legislature to set the date for the opening of the new legislative session in a state law at any time in January. Currently, it's constitutionally bound to start on the fourth Monday of the month.
Number six would create a constitutional right to hunt and fish in Utah.
Number seven would amend the constitution to allow the state to use property and income tax revenue to support children and the disabled. Currently, such revenues can only be spent on schools and colleges.
Virginians will be voting to amend their constitution to allow veterans with permanent, total, and 100% service-connected disabilities to exempt one car or pickup truck from commonwealth and local personal property taxes. This will easily pass.
The next amendment being voted on would create a 16-member redistricting commission composed of equal parts legislators and citizens. All new maps would need at least six members of both groups to be approved.
The next amendment being voted on would create a 16-member redistricting commission composed of equal parts legislators and citizens. All new maps would need at least six members of both groups to be approved.
Washingtonians will be voting to amend the constitution to allow the state to invest money from the state's Family and Medical Leave Insurance Account and the Long-Term Care Services and Supports Trust Account into stocks or other similar ventures. Currently, the state's only allowed to invest such money into bonds or CDs.
Because a Plaza wouldn't be complete without one, Wisconsin is voting on an amendment that would add Marsy's Law(a number of victim's rights provisions) to the constitution on their Primary Day, April 7. Like everywhere else that votes for one, this will pass. APPROVED
Amendment A would remove the current constitutional limit on how much debt a city can accrue when working on sewer projects. Currently, they can only go into debt for improvement projects up to a maximum of 4% of the assessed value of all taxable properties, plus an additional 4% for sewer projects. This would remove the second limit and allow the legislature to make its own decision on the matter.
