The first six posts in this series have focused mostly on federal elections with a handful of Governor’s races.  Of course, there are also state legislative races, some local (mostly county) races, and referendums.

While I am sure that somebody has a complete list of every local bond issue or city charter issue, this post will focus on the state-wide issues.  More specifically, this post will focus primarily on the changes that will make structural changes to the political system.  It’s not that votes on legalization of marijuana or changes to the criminal justice system are unimportant, it’s just that many of these referendums are the results of the failure of the elected politicians to address these issues.  and it’s the structural changes that may (or may not) make legislatures more responsive to these types of issues.

Several states are considering changes to the structure of elections  In Massachusetts, voters will have the option of following in Maine’s footsteps by adopting ranked-choice voting for most state and federal elections (except for President).

Florida is considering following the example of Washington, California, and Louisiana by abolishing partisan primaries.  Like in Washington and California, Florida would adopt a “top-two” primary system in which the two candidates who finish first and second regardless of party will advance to the general election.

Alaska is considering a unique variation on the top-two primary.  Instead of a top-two primary, Alaska is proposing a “top-four” primary.  Under this new system, the top four candidates would advance to the general election and the general election would be conducted under ranked-choice rules.

California has two issues related to elections on the ballot.  First, California is considering relaxing its rules on felon disenfranchisement to restore the right to vote upon completion of sentence.  Second, California is considering allowing those who will turn eighteen before the general election to vote in the primary.  This proposal also would allow municipalities to lower the voting age to sixteen for municipal elections.

Mississippi is considering a proposal to remove its weird rules for its governor election.  Under current law, a candidate needs a majority of the state-wide vote and a majority in a majority of state house districts.  Under the current law, the failure to get both majorities sends the election to the Mississippi House of Representatives.  The proposed new system would still require a majority of the state-wide vote with a run-off in no candidate gets 50% of the initial vote.

Finally, three states (Alabama, Colorado, and Florida) are considering changing their constitutions from providing that “every citizen” has a right to vote to providing that “only a citizen” has a right to vote.  This change, while subtle, could be interpreted as allowing some restrictions on the right to vote.

In Puerto Rico, voters are considering a referendum on potential statehood.  At the present time, Puerto Rico is one of the oldest territories in the U.S. having been a U.S. territory longer than Alaska was.  Additionally, Puerto Rico is larger in terms of population than any of the existing states were at the time of their admission to statehood.  Admittedly, a referendum of this type is unusual.  The normal historical pattern has been that Congress authorizes a territory to hold a constitutional convention to draft a state constitution (with certain conditions) and, upon adoption of a state constitution, admits the territory to statehood.  But, this referendum (if it passes) would put pressure on Congress to consider statehood.  As this site has discussed over the years, Puerto Rico’s current commonwealth status has led to some significant problem for Puerto Rico and the ability of Congress to make laws for Puerto Rico is a growing concern.

In Arkansas, voters are being considered to modify its legislative term limits from its current life-time limit of sixteen years to a limit of twelve consecutive years (with a break of four years after those twelve years before the legislator could seek a new term).  Arkansas is also considering a proposal to make it harder for the public to initiate a referendum and for the legislature to propose a constitutional amendment.

In addition to the proposed amendment on voting rights, Colorado is also considering whether to join the National Popular Vote Compact.

In Florida, in addition to the proposals discussed above, they are considering adding a requirement that proposed state constitutional amendments must receive approval from the voters in two separate elections.

In Missouri, we have two amendments on the ballot.  Under current law, the Governor and the State Treasurer are subject to term limits but other state officials are not.  The proposed amendment would extend term limits to the other state-wide elected official.

The other measure requires a little bit of explanation.  In 2018, Missouri voters approved a measure that imposed significant restrictions on campaign finance for legislative candidate and significant restrictions on gifts by lobbyist.  Most importantly, the measure substantially redid the process for legislative redistricting to turn it over to a non-partisan official with instructions to draw districts to make them fair and competitive.  The Republican legislature has convinced itself that it was the campaign finance reform that led to the 2018 measure passing.  So they have offered a new proposal that makes minor additional reductions to the limits on contributions and lobbyist gifts while restoring the old (and to be honest, broken) system for legislative redistricting.

In Nevada, voters are being asked to add the current statutory voter’s bill of rights to the state constitution.

In New Jersey, which holds legislative elections in odd-numbered years, voters are being asked to approve delaying re-districting until after the “_1” election in any census cycle in which the state receives its redistricting numbers after mid-February.

In Oregon, voters are being asked to authorize the state legislature to adopt limitations on campaign contributions.

Finally, in Virginia, voters are being asked to switch the redistricting power for legislative and congressional districts from the legislature to an independent commission.

While it matters who wins the White House and who wins the Senate for the policies that will be adopted over the next two to four years, these propositions will impact elections for years to come.  If you are in one of the states that has one of these proposition and you will be voting in-person on Tuesday, please study your state’s propositions carefully to understand what is truly being proposed.