Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2010 State Grades Full Final
2010 State Grades Full Final
2010 State Grades Full Final
Executive Summary
For over a century, the initiative and referen- larly struck down such barriers as violations of
dum process has given voters a greater voice in First Amendment rights.
their government. The right to initiative is recog- Citizens need ample time to collect signatures
nized by 24 states, as well as thousands of local on a petition, and the required number of signa-
jurisdictions all across the country. These proc- tures should be low enough that grassroots efforts
esses operate under widely varying laws, rules, have a chance at successfully making the ballot.
regulations, and restrictions, so that the petition Attempts to decrease the amount of time available
rights of citizens in one state may be quite differ- or raise the number of signatures required should
ent — and far less secure — than the rights of citi- also be rejected. Fundamentally, any attempt to
zens in another state. restrict the ability of the people to use the
Citizens in Charge Foundation believes that initiative and referendum process undermines our
citizens everywhere must have a say in their state basic democratic principle that government be of,
and local governments through a system of by, and for the people.
initiative and referendum that is open and accessi- Citizens in Charge Foundation has created this
ble to the average person. Furthermore, the right report card to give a clearer picture of the extent to
to petition our government should be interpreted which residents of various states have the ability
broadly with an eye toward allowing access to to affect their government through the initiative
voters and honoring their will. and referendum process. The startlingly low
Attempts to restrict initiative and referendum grades received by a majority of the states should
rights by putting up barriers to how petition signa- serve as a rallying point for citizens around the
tures can be collected, who can work for petition country. Even the relatively higher grades of what
campaigns, and how campaign workers can be might be called “the initiative states” show, in
paid should be rejected. Indeed, courts have regu- most cases, major room for improvement.
January 2010
Introduction
As governments have grown at local, metropoli- gathering by the state legislature, earns Wyoming
tan, state, and federal levels, the power of en- an F.
trenched factions has also grown, vis-à-vis the States that don’t recognize any statewide form
citizenry. Traditional representative government of petition rights all receive failing grades of D or
has proven unreliable in restraining itself constitu- F. While many of these states do recognize local
tionally, often to the point of uniting all branches petitioning rights, the failure to provide citizens
of America’s distributed powers against the very the ability to propose either statewide statutes or
people it was meant to serve. Institutions of constitutional amendments means citizens are de-
citizen-led democracy have evolved to help re- nied the means to effectively control the state
store this balance of power, in effect fulfilling a government to which local governments are le-
basic promise of republican governance: The right gally subservient.
to petition government. Initiative and referendum Citizens in Charge Foundation hopes that
thus serve as an expansion and perfection of one these grades will be used as a guide to help citi-
of the most basic principles of a limited republic. zens and lawmakers bring more openness and ac-
Though the right to petition government has cessibility to every state with an initiative and ref-
several centuries of development, and institution- erendum process, and encourage those states
alized rights to initiative and referendum just over without statewide initiative and referendum to
a century of practice in this country, these mecha- provide citizens with these powers.
nisms are by no means universal throughout the
United States. Method
This first annual report by Citizens in Charge In order to draw appropriate comparisons
Foundation finds that most of the 24 states with across all 50 states, Citizens in Charge Foundation
some form of statewide initiative rights received a looked at the most prominent and consistent fac-
grade no higher than a C. These states recognize tors affecting the people’s ability to petition
varying levels of petitioning rights, and most place government. Examining state constitutions and
restrictions against those engaged in the process legal codes, we looked at what outlets for citizen-
that lower their grade. Some states — such as led government were provided — statewide
Missouri and Ohio — have robust processes with citizen-initiated constitutional amendment, state-
few restrictions, earning them A grades. At the wide statutory initiative, statewide referendum, the
other end of the spectrum, Wyoming recognizes existence of a local initiative and referendum
statewide statutory initiative and referendum rights, process, and the breadth of local processes — and
but lacks a process to amend the state constitution awarded points accordingly.
through initiative. Wyoming’s limited process, We then noted the restrictions that states have
along with the many restrictions placed on petition placed in the way of citizens petitioning their
Citizens in Charge Foundation 2 CitizensInCharge.org/StateGrades
government — short circulation periods, high sig- tion can be held whereby voters can either
nature requirements, bans on campaign workers approve or reject the act passed by the legislature.
from other states circulating petitions, bans or limi- As a reaction to an act by the state legislature, the
tations on paying campaign workers who circulate referendum is more limited than the initiative.
petitions by the number of signatures they collect, Local Initiative—3 possible points
and requirements that petitions be circulated ac- States where citizens in certain municipalities
cording to a geographical/political distribution — or other local jurisdictions enjoy the powers of
and deducted points for each restriction. initiative and/or referendum were given one point.
Some states suffer from very unique barriers Local initiatives give citizens the power to affect
to the petition process, which for comparison pur- laws and initiate government reforms close to
poses were not calculated in their grade, but are home. Two additional points were given to states
noted at the end of their state report. where over half the population has access to a lo-
cal initiative or referendum process.
Points were added as follows:
Constitutional Amendment—3 points Points were subtracted for the
States that allow citizens to propose amend- following restrictions:
ments to the state constitution through a petition
Residency Requirement—1 point deducted
process were awarded three points. A constitution
States that ban non-residents from gathering pe-
is the fundamental contract by which citizens es-
tition signatures for initiatives and referendums lost a
tablish their government and citizens should have
point. This restriction prevents proponents from hir-
the power to propose changes to be voted on by
ing the best qualified people, making it more difficult
the people. Providing citizens with a process for
to meet the signature requirements to qualify a
initiating constitutional amendments upholds the
measure for the ballot. Residency requirements have
fundamental principle of government by the con-
generally been struck down by federal courts as un-
sent of the governed.
constitutional violations of First Amendment rights,
Statutory Initiative—3 points but remain on the books in 14 states (and have been
States that allow citizens to propose statutory enacted in recent years in Montana, Nebraska and
measures through a petition process were awarded South Dakota).
three points. This process allows citizens to pro-
Pay-Per-Signature Ban—1 point deducted
pose simple statutes to be voted on by the people. States that ban or limit paying campaign
States vary on whether such a voter-enacted workers who collect signatures on a petition based
statute can be amended or repealed by the state on the number of signatures they collect, or oth-
legislature, but in most cases, legislatures are able erwise restrict how campaign workers can be paid,
to make changes to initiative statutes. lost a point. Payment-per-signature allows citizens
Referendum—2 points greater certainty in judging the cost of a petition
States that allow citizens to call a statewide effort. Moreover, in states that have passed such
referendum — or People’s Veto — through the bans, the cost of successfully completing a peti-
petition process were given two points. A referen- tion drive has risen considerably, sometimes more
dum allows citizens to delay the implementation than doubling. Federal courts have struck down
of a law passed by the legislature* until an elec- these bans in five different states.
__________
*Wyoming is the only state where a referendum petition does not delay implementation of a legislative statute until an election to
decide the matter is held.
Alabama
F
Alaska
D
Arizona
C+
Arkansas
B+
California
B+
Colorado
C+
Connecticut
D
Delaware
F Nevada
B+
Florida
C– New Hampshire
D
Georgia
D New Jersey
D
Hawaii
D New York
D
Idaho
C North Carolina
F
Grading Scale New Mexico
D
Illinois
D
Indiana
F A
=
11 points North Dakota
C+
Iowa
F A-
=
10 points Ohio
A–
Kansas
D B+
=
9 points Oklahoma
C+
Kentucky
F B
=
8 points Oregon
B
Louisiana
D
Pennsylvania
F
C+
=
7 points
Maine
C
Rhode Island
D
C
=
6 points South Carolina
D
Maryland
D
Massachusetts
C–
C-
=
5 points South Dakota
B
Michigan
B
D
=
3-4 points Tennessee
D
Minnesota
D
D-
=
1-2 points Texas
D
Mississippi
F
F
=
0-1 points Utah
C–
Missouri
A–
Vermont
D
Montana
C+ Virginia
F
Nebraska
C
Washington
C+
West Virginia
F
Wisconsin
D
Wyoming
F
District of Columbia*
D
for initiatives and referendums. This prevents proponents
Alaska’s
Initiative &
from hiring the best qualified people, making it more difficult
to meet the signature requirements to qualify a measure for
the ballot. Similar residency requirements in other states
Referendum Rights have been struck down as unconstitutional violations of citi-
zens’ First Amendment rights. (AS, 15.45.105.03)
Statutory Initiative—3 points
Alaska’s state constitution authorizes Distribution Requirement—½ point deducted
citizens to propose simple statutes In addition to gathering petition signatures from 10 percent
through the petition process. Alaska of the voters in the last statewide election, Alaska requires
receives three points. (Alaska that signatures must come from three-fourths of the state’s
Constitution, Article XI §1-7) House districts, equal to 7 percent of the vote in each district.
This distribution requirement adds to the difficulty of quali-
Referendum—2 points fying an initiative and significantly increases the cost of peti-
Alaska’s state constitution author- tioning. (Alaska Constitution, Article XI §3)
izes citizens to call a statewide ref-
erendum — or People’s Veto — by Payment Restriction—1 point deducted
petition, permitting citizens to then Alaska limits the pay a person circulating a petition can re-
either approve or reject acts passed ceive to no more than $1 per petition signature gathered. This
by the legislature. Alaska receives artificial cap on pay makes it harder for campaigns to recruit
two points. (Alaska Constitution, petition circulators. The cap is vulnerable to a constitutional
Article XI §1 & 5) challenge. (AS, 15.45.110.c)
Local Initiative—3 points High Signature Requirement—1 point deducted
Residents of Alaska municipalities At 10 percent of the vote in the last election, Alaska’s high
have access to local initiative and statutory initiative signature requirement makes it extremely
referendum. The state receives one difficult for less well-funded campaigns to succeed in peti-
point for its local initiative and ref- tioning an issue onto the ballot. Only one state, Wyoming,
erendum processes and two addi- has a higher signature requirement for initiative statutes than
tional points because the local Alaska’s 10 percent. In fact, the Last Frontier’s requirement
initiative is available to most Alas- for a statutory initiative is more onerous than the requirement
kans. (AS, 29.26.100) for a constitutional amendment in seven other states. (Alaska
Constitution, Article XI §3)
Citizens in Charge Foundation 7 CitizensInCharge.org/StateGrades
Alaska can improve its grade by making its initiative
process more open and accessible to the average citizen.
Eliminate Restrictions
End the $1 per-signature limit on paying people to circulate petitions: Alaska could gain one point by
repealing the limit of $1 per signature on payments to people who circulate petitions. (AS, 15.45.110.c)
Allow people from outside Alaska to help Alaskans petition their government: Repealing the
requirement that only residents of Alaska can circulate petitions would give Alaska an additional point.
(AS, 15.45.105.03)
Count each signature equally: Repealing the requirement that signatures be gathered from at least three
fourths of the state’s legislative districts, and allowing voters from any part of the state to sign a petition
on equal footing would give Alaska an additional half point. (Alaska Constitution, Article XI §3)
Amendments—1 point deducted
Arizona’s Initiative
& Referendum Rights High signature requirements make it very difficult to qual-
ify an initiative or referendum for the ballot, and fall espe-
cially hard on grassroots volunteer efforts. Because Ari-
Constitutional Amendment zona’s signature requirement is above 10 percent of the
—3 points number of votes cast for governor in the last election, one
Arizona’s state constitution authorizes point was deducted. (Arizona Constitution, Article XXI §1)
citizens to propose constitutional
amendments through the petition High Signature Requirement for Statutory Initia-
process. Arizona receives three points. tives—1 point deducted
(Arizona Constitution, Article XXI §1) Arizona’s signature requirement for simple statues is
above 8 percent of the number of votes cast for governor
Statutory Initiative—3 points in the last election, thus one point was deducted. (Arizona
Arizona’s state constitution authorizes Constitution, Article XXI §1)
citizens to propose simple statutes by
petition. Arizona receives three points. Residency Requirement—1 point deducted
(Arizona Constitution, Article IV §1) Arizona bans non-residents from gathering petition signa-
tures for initiatives and referendums. This prevents pro-
Referendum—2 points ponents from hiring the best qualified people, making it
Arizona’s state constitution authorizes more difficult to meet the signature requirements to qual-
citizens to call a statewide referendum ify a measure for the ballot. The federal Ninth Circuit
— or People’s Veto — by petition, per- Court of Appeals has already struck down the state’s resi-
mitting citizens to then either approve dency requirement for independent presidential candidates
or reject laws passed by the legislature. as an unconstitutional violation of citizens’ First Amend-
Arizona receives two points. (Arizona ment rights. (AS, 19-112)
Constitution, Article IV §1)
Guilt By Association Law—1 point deducted
Local Initiative—3 points Arizona law allows any person employing or contracting
Residents of Arizona municipalities with petition circulators to be charged with a felony if five
have access to local initiative and refer- or more people employed or under contract to them are
endum. The state receives one point for convicted of a misdemeanor violation of petition laws. The
its local initiative and referendum proc- manager can be charged regardless of whether he or she
esses and two additional points because had any knowledge that employees or contractors were in
the local initiative is available to most violation of the law. Because innocent people can be im-
Arizonans. prisoned for the independent acts of others, this law creates
a chilling effect on the petition process. (AS, 19-119.01.B)
Eliminate Restrictions
Allow people from outside of Arizona to help Arizonans petition their government: Repealing the
requirement that in order to circulate petitions one must be a resident of Arizona, would give Arizona an
additional point. (AS, 19-112)
Repeal the unfair and almost certainly unconstitutional new law criminalizing individuals for the ac-
tions of those employed or contracted by them. This would result in gaining one additional point. (AS,
19-119.01.B)
Additional Notes
In 2008 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Arizona’s residency requirement in Nader v.
Brewer, a lawsuit over petition circulators for independent presidential candidate ballot access. Though
the Court ruling specifically mentioned that residency requirements for initiative and other candidate peti-
tion would likewise be unconstitutional, the legislature decided in 2009 to take a narrow interpretation of
the court’s ruling and legalized non-resident campaign workers for independent presidential candidates
only, leaving the ban in place for other kinds of petitions. Currently the requirement is back under chal-
lenge in Arizona Green Party v. Bennett.
Arkansas’s Initiative
& Referendum Rights
Constitutional Amendment—3 points
Arkansas’s state constitution authorizes citizens
Restrictions on Arkansas’s Initiative
& Referendum Rights
Distribution Requirement—½ point deducted
Arkansas requires that, in addition to gathering sig-
natures of 10 percent of voters from the last state-
to propose constitutional amendments through the
wide election, signatures equal to 5 percent must be
petition process. Arkansas receives three points.
gathered in 15 of 75 counties for amendments and
(Arkansas Constitution, Article V §1)
signatures equal to 4 percent in 15 of 75 counties
Statutory Initiative—3 points for statutes. This distribution requirement adds to
Arkansas’s state constitution authorizes citizens the difficulty of qualifying an initiative and signifi-
to propose simple statutes by petition. Arkansas cantly increases the cost of petitioning. (Arkansas
receives three points. (Arkansas Constitution, Ar- Constitution, Article V §1)
ticle V §1)
High Signature Requirement for Constitutional
Referendum—2 points Amendments—½ point deducted
Arkansas’s state constitution authorizes citizens High signature requirements make it very difficult
to call a statewide referendum — or People’s to qualify an initiative or referendum for the ballot,
Veto — by petition, permitting citizens to then and fall especially hard on grassroots volunteer
either approve or reject laws passed by the legis- efforts. Because Arkansas’s signature requirement
lature. Arkansas receives two points. (Arkansas is above 8 percent of the number of votes cast for
Constitution, Article V §1) governor in the last election, a half point was
deducted. (Arkansas Constitution, Article V §1)
Local Initiative—3 points
Residents of Arkansas municipalities have access High Signature Requirement for Statutory Ini-
to local initiative and referendum. The state re- tiatives—½ point deducted
ceives one point for its local initiative and refer- Arkansas’s signature requirement for statutory
endum processes and two additional points be- initiatives is above 5 percent of the number of
cause the local initiative is available to most Ar- votes cast for governor in the last election, thus a
kansans. (Arkansas Constitution, Article V §1) half point was deducted. (Arkansas Constitution,
Article V §1)
Eliminate Restrictions
Count each signature equally: Repealing the requirement that signatures be gathered from 15 of 75
counties in the state and allowing voters from any part of the state to sign the petition on equal footing
(Arkansas Constitution, Article V §1) would give Arkansas an additional half point.
Additional Notes
Arkansas’s ballot title process allows legal challenges at any time, even after the required number of vot-
ers have signed petitions. Numerous initiatives have been removed from the ballot due to the state su-
preme court finding the ballot title to be insufficient or misleading. This has happened even when propo-
nents accept a title written by the attorney general. This vulnerability of initiative campaigns to ballot title
challenges discourages citizens from using the process. Arkansas could benefit from legislation requiring
challenges to a ballot title to come prior to the petition period, as was enacted in neighboring Oklahoma in
2009.
Eliminate Restrictions
Allow people from outside of California to help Californians petition their government: Repealing
the requirement that in order to circulate petitions one must be a resident of California would give Cali-
fornia an additional point. (California Elections Code, Section 102)
Additional Notes
In 2009, the California Legislature passed four bills that would have restricted the state’s initiative
process, including an attempt to ban paying campaign workers by the number of signatures they collect,
place additional requirements on petition firms and increase the petition filing fee fourfold. Governor Ar-
nold Schwarzenegger vetoed all four bills, arguing they were aimed at chilling the petition process. The
governor’s vetoes won him Citizens in Charge Foundation’s November 2008 John Lilburne Award for
protecting the right to petition government.
Colorado bans non-residents from gathering petition sig-
natures for initiatives and referendums. This prevents pro-
Colorado’s Initiative
& Referendum Rights ponents from hiring the best qualified people, making it
more difficult to meet the signature requirements to qual-
ify a measure for the ballot. Similar residency require-
Constitutional Amendment
ments in other states have been struck down as unconstitu-
—3 points
tional violations of citizens’ First Amendment rights.
Colorado’s state constitution authorizes
(Colorado Statutes, 1-40-112)
citizens to propose constitutional
amendments through the petition Pay-Per-Signature Ban—1 point deducted
process. Colorado receives three points. Colorado bans paying campaign workers who help collect
(Colorado Constitution, Article V §1) signatures on a ballot initiative, referendum or recall peti-
tion more than 20 percent of their pay based on the num-
Statutory Initiative—3 points
ber of signatures they collect. This artificial restriction on
Colorado’s state constitution authorizes
pay makes it harder for campaigns to recruit workers.
citizens to propose simple statutes by
(Colorado Statutes, 1-40-112 §4)
petition. Colorado receives three points.
(Colorado Constitution, Article V §1) Petition Sponsors Vulnerable to Harassment
—1 point deducted
Referendum—2 points
Colorado petition sponsors can be sued for attorney’s fees
Colorado’s state constitution authorizes
by people who successfully challenge the validity of peti-
citizens to call a statewide referendum
tion signatures. This encourages harassing lawsuits that
— or People’s Veto — by petition, per-
can punish initiative proponents for signatures that are
mitting citizens to then either approve
disqualified. In any petition effort, no matter how diligent,
or reject laws passed by the legislature.
some signatures are likely to be disqualified for any num-
Colorado receives two points. (Colo-
ber of reasons — from a signer’s voter registration having
rado Constitution, Article V §1)
lapsed to a mistake made in filling out the petition. This
Local Initiative—3 points statute encourages increased litigation against initiative
Residents of Colorado municipalities sponsors. (Colorado Statutes, 1-40-118)
have access to local initiative and refer-
Insufficient Circulation Period (Statutory
endum. The state receives a point for its
Initiatives)—½ point deducted
local initiative and referendum proc-
esses and two additional points because Colorado petition sponsors have only six months to collect
the local initiative is available to most the required number of signatures to qualify a statutory
Coloradans. initiative for the ballot. Petition sponsors need ample time
to collect the tens of thousands of signatures needed to
Citizens in Charge Foundation 15 CitizensInCharge.org/StateGrades
qualify: Colorado’s short six-month period does not allow enough time.
Insufficient Circulation Period (Constitutional Amendments)—½ point deducted
Colorado petition sponsors have only six months to collect the required number of signatures to qualify
a constitutional amendment for the ballot. Petition sponsors need ample time to collect the tens of thou-
sands of signatures needed to qualify and Colorado’s short six-month period does not allow enough
time. (Colorado Statutes, 1-40-108)
Eliminate Restrictions
Allow people from outside of Colorado to help Coloradans petition their government: Repealing the
requirement that one must be a resident of Colorado to circulate petitions would give Colorado an addi-
tional point. (Colorado Statutes, 1-40-112)
Ease restrictions on paid circulators: Colorado could gain a point by repealing its ban on paying cam-
paign workers who collect signatures more than 20 percent of their compensation on the number of sig-
natures they collect (Colorado Statutes, 1-40-112 §4).
Repeal the statute encouraging lawsuits against initiative proponents: By making the sponsors of
initiatives liable for the attorney’s fees of those challenging the validity of petition signatures, this law
promotes litigation and increases the financial risk to citizens proposing an initiative. Repealing this
statute would result in Colorado gaining one additional point. (Colorado Statutes, 1-40-116)
Additional Notes
In 2009, the Colorado Legislature passed House Bill 1326, which placed severe restrictions on paying
campaign workers by the number of signatures they collect and made petition sponsors vulnerable to har-
assing lawsuits by allowing people who successfully challenge the validity of signatures in court to sue
the campaign to recover attorney’s fee. The Rocky Mountain State lost a point for each of these two
restrictions, reducing Colorado’s grade from a B+ to a C+ in this one legislative act.
Citizens in Charge Foundation 16 CitizensInCharge.org/StateGrades
Connecticut D
Connecticut citizens do not have any
Score: 3
statewide initiative and referendum
rights. A majority of state citizens do
enjoy local initiative and referendum
rights.
Florida’s
Initiative &
Referendum Rights
Restrictions on Florida’s
Initiative & Referendum Rights
Distribution Requirement—½ point deducted
Florida requires that, in addition to gathering signatures equal to 10
Constitutional Amend- percent of voters in the last presidential election, petition signatures
ment—3 points must also be gathered from at least half of the congressional districts
Florida’s state constitution in the state. This distribution requirement adds to the difficulty of
authorizes citizens to propose qualifying an initiative and significantly increases the cost of peti-
constitutional amendments by tioning. (Florida Constitution, Article XI §3)
petition. Florida receives three
points. (Florida Constitution,
Article XI §3) Florida can improve its grade by
Local Initiative—3 points making its initiative process more open
Residents of Florida munici- and accessible to the average citizen.
palities have access to local
initiative and referendum. The
state receives a point for its lo- Expand Citizen Access
cal initiative and referendum Allow citizens to propose state statutory laws: Florida
processes and two additional could gain three points by creating a process for citizens to
points because the local propose statutory laws by petition.
initiative is available to most Allow citizens to call a referendum or people’s veto on acts
Floridians. passed by the legislature: Florida could gain two points by
creating a statewide referendum process.
Idaho’s
Initiative &
Referendum
Rights
Statutory Initiative—3 points
Idaho’s state constitution authorizes Restrictions on Idaho’s
citizens to propose simple statutes Initiative & Referendum Rights
by petition. Idaho receives three
points. (Idaho Constitution, Article Residency Requirement—1 point deducted
III §1) Idaho bans non-residents from gathering petition signa-
tures for initiatives and referendums. This prevents pro-
Referendum—2 points ponents from hiring the best qualified people, making it
Idaho’s state constitution authorizes more difficult to meet the signature requirements to qual-
citizens to call a statewide referen- ify a measure for the ballot. Similar residency require-
dum — or People’s Veto — by peti- ments in other states have been struck down as unconsti-
tion, permitting citizens to then ei- tutional violations of citizens’ First Amendment rights.
ther approve or reject laws passed (Idaho Statutes, 34-1807)
by the legislature. Idaho receives
two points. (Idaho Constitution, Insufficient Circulation Period (Statutory
Article III §1) Initiatives)—½ point deducted
Idaho petition sponsors have only five months to collect
Local Initiative—3 points the required number of signatures to qualify a statutory
Residents of Idaho municipalities initiative for the ballot. Petition sponsors need ample time
have access to local initiative and to collect the tens of thousands of signatures needed to
referendum. The state receives a qualify, and Idaho’s short five month period does not al-
point for its local initiative and ref- low enough time.
erendum processes and two addi-
tional points because the local
initiative is available to most Idaho-
ans.
Increase the time allotted to circulate petitions: Idaho could gain half a point by increasing the
circulation period for a statutory initiative to at least nine months.
Eliminate Restrictions
Allow people from outside of Idaho to help Idahoans petition their government: Repealing the
requirement that in order to circulate petitions one must be a resident of Idaho, would give Idaho an addi-
tional point. (Idaho Statutes, 34-1807)
Restrictions on Illinois’s
Illinois’s Initiative & Referendum Rights
Initiative &
Referendum
Severely Limited Constitutional Amendment Process
—2½ points deducted
Rights Illinois’s constitutional amendment process is severely limited
to initiatives dealing only with structural and procedural
Constitutional Amendment changes to the constitutional article concerning the legislature.
—3 points Only one statewide initiative has ever been on the ballot, and
Illinois’s state constitution many observers do not consider Illinois to be truly an initiative
authorizes citizens to propose state. We deducted two and a half points from Illinois because
constitutional amendments by the state’s constitutional amendment process is completely inef-
petition. Illinois receives three fective.
points. (Illinois Constitution,
Article XIV §3)
Illinois can improve its grade by
Local Initiative—3 points making its initiative process more open
Residents of Illinois munici-
palities have access to local and accessible to the average citizen.
initiative and referendum. The
state receives a point for its
local initiative and referendum Expand Citizen Access
processes and two additional Allow citizens a full-fledged constitutional amendment
points because the local process: Illinois could gain two and a half points by allow-
initiative is available to most ing citizens to propose constitutional amendments on any
Illinois citizens. subject, rather than the current process that is limited to
structural and procedural changes to the constitution’s legis-
lative article.
Allow citizens to propose state statutory laws: Illinois could gain three points by creating a process
for citizens to propose statutory laws by petition.
Allow citizens to call a referendum or people’s veto on acts passed by the legislature: Illinois could
gain two points by creating a statewide referendum process.
Maine’s
Initiative &
Referendum Restrictions on Maine’s
Rights Initiative & Referendum Rights
Statutory Initiative—3 points Residency Requirement—1 point deducted
Maine’s state constitution authorizes Maine bans non-residents from gathering petition
citizens to propose simple statutes by signatures for initiatives and referendums. This
petition. Maine receives three points. prevents proponents from hiring the best qualified
(Maine Constitution, Article IV §17) people, making it more difficult to meet the signa-
Referendum—2 points ture requirements to qualify a measure for the
Maine’s state constitution authorizes ballot. Similar residency requirements in other
citizens to call a statewide referendum states have been struck down as unconstitutional
— or People’s Veto — by petition, violations of citizens’ First Amendment rights.
permitting citizens to then either (Maine Revised Statutes, Title 21-A §903-A)
approve or reject laws passed by the High Signature Requirement for Statutory
legislature. Maine receives two points. Initiatives—1 point deducted
(Maine Constitution, Article IV §17) High signature requirements make it very difficult
Local Initiative—3 points to qualify an initiative or referendum for the bal-
Residents of Maine municipalities lot, and fall especially hard on grassroots volun-
have access to local initiative and ref- teer efforts. Maine loses a point because the
erendum. The state receives one point state’s signature requirement is above 8 percent of
for its local initiative and referendum votes cast for governor in the last election. (Maine
processes and two additional points Constitution, Article IV §17, §18)
because the local initiative is available
to most Maine citizens.
Eliminate Restrictions
Allow people from outside of Maine to help Mainers petition their government: Repealing the
requirement that only residents of Maine can circulate petitions would give Maine an additional point.
(Maine Revised, Statutes Title 21-A §903-A)
Restrictions on Maryland’s
Initiative & Referendum Rights
Maryland’s
Initiative &
Referendum Rights
Distribution Requirement—½ point deducted
Maryland requires that, in addition to gathering signatures of 3
percent of voters in the last election for governor, no more than
half of required signatures may be from any one county or the
City of Baltimore. This distribution requirement adds to the diffi-
Referendum—2 points culty of qualifying a referendum and significantly increases the
Maryland’s state constitution cost of petitioning. (Maryland Constitution, Article XVI §3)
authorizes citizens to call a
statewide referendum — or
People’s Veto — by petition,
permitting citizens to then ei- Maryland can improve its grade by
ther approve or reject laws making its initiative process more open
passed by the legislature. and accessible to the average citizen.
Maryland receives two points.
(Maryland Constitution,
Article XVI §1)
Expand Citizen Access
Local Initiative—3 points Allow citizens to propose state constitutional amendments:
Residents of Maryland munici- Maryland could gain three points by creating a process for
palities have access to local citizens to amend the state constitution through initiative.
initiative and referendum. The
Allow citizens to propose statutory laws: Maryland could
state receives a point for its lo-
gain three points by creating a process for citizens to propose
cal initiative and referendum
statutory laws through initiative.
processes and two additional
points because the local
initiative is available to most Eliminate Restrictions
Count each signature equally: Repealing the requirement that no
Maryland citizens. (Maryland
more than half of the necessary signatures may come from any one
Constitution, Article XVI §2)
county or the city of Baltimore and allowing voters from any part of
the state to sign the petition on equal footing would give Maryland an
additional half point. (Maryland Constitution, Article XVI § 3)
Eliminate Restrictions
Count each signature equally: Repealing the requirement that no more than one fourth of signatures be
gathered from any one county and allowing voters from any part of the state to sign the petition on equal
footing (Massachusetts Constitution, Article XLVII) would give Massachusetts an additional half point.
Michigan’s Initiative
& Referendum Rights
Constitutional Amendment
—3 points
Restrictions on Michigan’s
Michigan’s state constitution authorizes Initiative & Referendum Rights
citizens to propose constitutional
amendments by petition. Michigan re- Residency Requirement—1 point deducted
ceives three points. (Michigan Michigan bans non-residents from gathering petition sig-
Constitution, Article XII §2) natures for initiatives and referendums. This prevents pro-
ponents from hiring the best qualified people, making it
Statutory Initiative—3 points more difficult to meet the signature requirements to qual-
Michigan’s state constitution author- ify a measure for the ballot. A similar residency
izes citizens to propose simple statutes requirement for recall petitions in Michigan has been
by petition. Michigan receives three struck down as an unconstitutional violation of citizens’
points. (Michigan Constitution, Article First Amendment rights, as have similar restrictions in
II §9) other states. (Michigan Statutes, 168.544c(3))
Referendum—2 points High Signature Requirement (Constitutional
Michigan’s state constitution author- Amendments)—½ point deducted
izes citizens to call a statewide refer- High signature requirements make it very difficult to qual-
endum — or People’s Veto — by peti- ify an initiative or referendum for the ballot, and fall espe-
tion, permitting citizens to then either cially hard on grassroots volunteer efforts. Because
approve or reject laws passed by the Michigan’s signature requirement is above 8 percent of
legislature. Michigan receives two the number of votes cast for governor in the last election
points. (Michigan Constitution, Article we deducted a half point. (Michigan Constitution, Article
II §9) XII §2)
Local Initiative—3 points High Signature Requirement (Statutory Initia-
Residents of Michigan municipalities tives)—½ point deducted
have access to local initiative and ref- High signature requirements make it very difficult to qual-
erendum. The state receives a point for ify an initiative or referendum for the ballot, and fall espe-
its local initiative and referendum cially hard on grassroots volunteer efforts. Because
processes and two additional points Michigan’s signature requirement is above 5 percent of
because the local initiative is available the number of votes cast for governor in the last election
to most Michigan citizens. we deducted a half point.
Eliminate Restrictions
Allow people from outside of Michigan to help Michiganders petition their government: Repealing
the requirement that in order to circulate initiative and referendum petitions one must be a resident of
Michigan would give Michigan an additional one point. (Michigan Statutes, 168.544c(3))
Additional Notes
In December of 2009, Michigan’s residency requirement for campaign workers circulating a recall peti-
tion was ruled unconstitutional by the federal Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The case, Boegard v. Land,
arose from a 2008 recall petition effort in which people who did not live in the district of the official be-
ing recalled helped gather signatures. Michigan Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land has announced that
the state will continue to enforce the state law requiring those who circulate an initiative petition to be
state residents.
Restrictions on Mississippi’s
Initiative & Referendum Rights
Mississippi’s
High Signature Requirement for Constitutional
Initiative &
Referendum
Rights
Amendments—1 point deducted
High signature requirements make it very difficult to qualify
an initiative or referendum for the ballot, and fall especially
hard on grassroots volunteer efforts. Because Mississippi’s
Constitutional Amendment
signature requirement is above 10 percent of the number of
—3 points votes cast for governor in the last election, one point was
Mississippi’s state constitution deducted. (Mississippi Constitution, Article XV §273(3))
authorizes citizens to propose con-
stitutional amendments by petition. Distribution Requirement—½ point deducted
Mississippi receives three points. Mississippi law requires that, in addition to gathering signa-
(Mississippi Constitution, Article tures of 12 percent of votes cast for governor in last state-
XV §273(1, 3)) wide election, no more than one fifth of petition signatures
can come from any one of the states five congressional
Local Initiative—1 point districts.* This distribution requirement adds to the difficulty
Residents of some Mississippi mu- of qualifying an initiative and significantly increases the cost
nicipalities have access to local of petitioning. (Mississippi Constitution, Article XV
initiative and referendum. The state §273(3))
receives one point for its local
initiative and referendum processes. Residency Requirement—1 point deducted
Mississippi bans non-residents from gathering petition signa-
tures for initiatives and referendums. This prevents propo-
nents from hiring the best qualified people, making it more
difficult to meet the signature requirements to qualify a
measure for the ballot. Similar residency requirements in
other states have been struck down as unconstitutional viola-
tions of citizens’ First Amendment rights. (Mississippi Code,
§23-17-17(2))
_________________
* Mississippi lost one Congressional district following the 2000 federal census and now has only four. Because the state
constitution mandates that no more than one fifth of petition signatures can come from any one congressional district, the Sec-
retary of State has adopted a policy of using the five old congressional district boundaries for the purposes of fulfilling the
distribution requirement.
Eliminate Restrictions
Count each signature equally: Repealing the requirement that signatures be gathered from each of the
five congressional districts in the state and allowing voters from any part of the state to sign the petition
on equal footing would give Mississippi an additional half point. (Mississippi Constitution, Article XI §
3)
Allow people from outside of Mississippi to help Mississippians petition their government: Repeal-
ing the requirement that in order to circulate petitions one must be a resident of Mississippi would give
Mississippi an additional point. (Mississippi Code, §23-17-17(2))
of votes cast in the last election for governor be gath-
Missouri’s Initiative &
Referendum Rights ered from six of the state’s nine congressional dis-
tricts. This distribution requirement adds to the diffi-
culty of qualifying an initiative and significantly in-
Constitutional Amendment—3 points
creases the cost of petitioning. (Missouri
Missouri’s state constitution authorizes Constitution, Article III §50)
citizens to propose constitutional amend-
ments by petition. Missouri receives three
points. (Missouri Constitution, Article III Missouri can improve its grade
§49) by making its initiative process
Statutory Initiative—3 points more open and accessible to the
Missouri’s state constitution authorizes average citizen.
citizens to propose simple statutes by peti-
tion. Missouri receives three points.
(Missouri Constitution, Article III §49)
Eliminate Restrictions
Count each signature equally: Repealing the
Referendum—2 points requirement that signatures be gathered from six out of
Missouri’s state constitution authorizes nine congressional districts in the state and allowing
citizens to call a statewide referendum — voters from any part of the state to sign the petition on
or People’s Veto — by petition, permitting equal footing, would give Missouri an additional half
citizens to then either approve or reject any point. (Missouri Constitution, Article III §49)
act passed by the legislature. Missouri re-
ceives two points. (Missouri Constitution, Additional Notes
Article III §49) In recent years, litigation over the ballot titles and
fiscal notes written for initiatives by the Secretary of
Local Initiative—3 points
State and the State Auditor, respectively, has resulted
Residents of Missouri municipalities have
in significant delays, in several cases scuttling peti-
access to local initiative and referendum.
tion efforts as the petition period has been exhausted
The state receives a point for its local
by the litigation. Legislation to establish deadlines for
initiative and referendum processes and
lawsuits challenging ballot titles and fiscal notes, so
two additional points because the local
that citizens would be guaranteed ample time to col-
initiative is available to most Missouri citi-
lect the petition signatures, has been introduced and
zens.
may be considered in the 2010 legislative session.
Citizens in Charge Foundation 41 CitizensInCharge.org/StateGrades
Montana C+ Score: 7.5
Montana citizens enjoy the right to propose
constitutional amendments and state laws by
petition, and to call a People’s Veto (a state-
Restrictions on Montana’s
wide referendum) on any law passed by the
legislature. In order to place a constitutional Initiative & Referendum Rights
amendment on the ballot, citizens must collect Residency Requirement—1 point deducted
the signatures of registered voters equal to 10 Montana bans non-residents from gathering petition sig-
percent of the votes cast for governor in the natures for initiatives and referendums. This prevents
last statewide election — currently 48,673. proponents from hiring the best qualified people, making
it more difficult to meet the signature requirements to
Montana’s Initiative qualify a measure for the ballot. Similar residency re-
quirements in other states have been struck down as un-
& Referendum Rights
Constitutional Amendment—3 points
constitutional violations of citizens’ First Amendment
rights. (Montana Statutes, 13-27-102(2)(a))
Distribution Requirement—½ point deducted
Montana’s state constitution authorizes citi-
zens to propose constitutional amendments Montana requires that, in addition to gathering signa-
by petition. Montana receives three points. tures of 10 percent of voters from the last statewide
(Montana Constitution, Article III §9) election for a constitutional amendment, petition sig-
natures equaling 10 percent must also be gathered in
Statutory Initiative—3 points 40 legislative districts, and in addition to gathering
Montana’s state constitution authorizes citi- signatures of 5 percent of voters from the last state-
zens to propose simple statutes by petition. wide election for a statute, petition signatures equaling
Montana receives three points. (Montana 5 percent must also be gathered in 34 legislative dis-
Constitution, Article III §4) tricts. This distribution requirement adds to the diffi-
culty of qualifying an initiative and significantly in-
Referendum—2 points
creases the cost of petitioning. (Montana Constitution,
Montana’s state constitution authorizes citi-
Article III §4(2), Article III §5(1))
zens to call a statewide referendum — or
People’s Veto — by petition, permitting Pay-Per-Signature Ban—1 point deducted
citizens to then either approve or reject any Montana bans paying campaign workers who help
act passed by the legislature. Montana re- collect signatures on a ballot initiative, referendum or
ceives two points. (Montana Constitution, recall petition by the number of signatures they col-
Article III §5) lect. Similar bans have been ruled unconstitutional in
five states. (Montana Statutes 13-27-102(2)(b))
Local Initiative—3 points
Residents of Montana municipalities have High Signature Requirement—½ point deducted
access to local initiative and referendum. High signature requirements make it very difficult to
The state receives a point for its local qualify an initiative or referendum for the ballot, and
initiative and referendum processes and two fall especially hard on grassroots volunteer efforts. Be-
additional points because the local initiative cause Montana’s signature requirement is above 8 per-
is available to most Montana citizens. cent of the total number of votes cast for governor in
the last election, half a point was deducted. (Montana
Constitution, Article III §4(2), Article III §5(1))
Citizens in Charge Foundation 42 CitizensInCharge.org/StateGrades
Montana can improve its grade by making its initiative
process more open and accessible to the average citizen.
Eliminate Restrictions
Allow people from outside of Montana to help Montanans petition their government: Repealing the
requirement that in order to circulate petitions one must be a resident of Montana, would give Montana
an additional point. (Montana Statutes, 13-27-102(2)(a))
Ease restrictions on paid circulators: Montana could gain a point by repealing its ban on paying people
who circulate petitions by the number of signatures they collect. (Montana Statutes, 13-27-102(2)(b))
fall especially hard on grassroots volunteer efforts.
Nebraska’s signature requirement is based on regis-
Nebraska’s Initiative
& Referendum Rights tered voters, rather than the number of votes cast
statewide in the last election. Since far more citizens
are registered to vote than actually vote in any given
Constitutional Amendment—3 points
election, Nebraska’s requirement (10 percent of regis-
Nebraska’s state constitution authorizes citi- tered voters) is far greater than the same percentage
zens to propose constitutional amendments of the last vote for governor or other statewide office.
by petition. Nebraska receives three points. Thus, one point was deducted. (Nebraska Constitution
(Nebraska Constitution, Article III §2) Article III §2)
Statutory Initiative—3 points High Signature Requirement (Statutory
Nebraska state constitution authorizes citi- Initiatives)—1 point deducted
zens to propose simple statutes by petition.
High signature requirements make it very difficult to
Nebraska receives three points. (Nebraska
qualify an initiative or referendum for the ballot. Ne-
Constitution, Article III §2)
braska’s signature requirement is based on registered
Referendum—2 points voters, rather than the number of votes cast statewide
Nebraska’s state constitution authorizes in the last election. Since far more citizens are regis-
citizens to call a statewide referendum — or tered to vote than actually vote in any given election,
People’s Veto — by petition, permitting Nebraska’s requirement (7 percent of registered vot-
citizens to then either approve or reject laws ers) is far greater than 8 percent of the last vote for
passed by the legislature. Nebraska receives governor or other statewide office. Thus, one point
two points. (Nebraska Constitution, Article was deducted.
III §3) Distribution Requirement—½ point deducted
Local Initiative—3 points Nebraska requires that, in addition to gathering signa-
Residents of Nebraska municipalities have tures of 10 percent of registered voters at the time sig-
access to local initiative and referendum. natures are turned in, petition signatures equaling 5
The state receives a point for its local percent of registered voters must also be gathered from
initiative and referendum processes and two at least two-fifths of the counties in the state. This
additional points because the local initiative distribution requirement adds to the difficulty of quali-
is available to most Nebraska citizens. fying an initiative and significantly increases the cost
of petitioning. (Nebraska Constitution, Article III §2)
* The exact number of petition signatures needed is impossible to calculate, as it depends on the number of registered voters on
the state’s rolls in the future — that is, at the time the signatures are submitted. Because state lists of registered voters constantly
change, as well as being notoriously out-of-date, Citizens in Charge Foundation urges states to set petition requirements on a
percentage of the last vote for governor (or other statewide office) rather than a percentage of registered voters.
Additional Notes
In December of 2009 the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging Ne-
braska’s residency requirement, distribution requirement, and “scarlet letter law” (a requirement that peti-
tions say whether the person carrying them is paid to do so or not). The lawsuit is Citizens in Charge v.
Gale. A second lawsuit, Bernbeck v. Gale, was filed in January 2010 challenging Nebraska’s ban on pay-
ing campaign workers per-signature, the residency requirement and a requirement that petition circulators
be over 18. Both cases are pending.
Nevada’s Restrictions on Nevada’s
Initiative &
Referendum
Initiative & Referendum Rights
High Signature Requirement (Constitutional
Rights Amendments)—½ point deducted
High signature requirements make it very difficult to qual-
Constitutional Amendment
ify an initiative or referendum for the ballot, and fall espe-
—3 points
cially hard on grassroots volunteer efforts. Because Ne-
Nevada’s state constitution authorizes
vada’s signature requirement is above 8 percent of the
citizens to propose constitutional
number of votes cast for governor in the last election, half a
amendments by petition. Nevada re-
point was deducted. (Nevada Constitution, Article 19 § 2)
ceives three points. (Nevada
Constitution, Article 19 § 2) High Signature Requirement (Statutory
Initiatives)—1 point deducted
Statutory Initiative—3 points
High signature requirements make it very difficult to
Nevada’s state constitution authorizes
qualify an initiative or referendum for the ballot, and fall
citizens to propose simple statutes by
especially hard on grassroots volunteer efforts. Because
petition. Nevada receives three points.
Nevada’s signature requirement is above 8 percent of the
(Nevada Constitution, Article 19 § 2)
number of votes cast for governor in the last election
Referendum—2 points one point was deducted. (Nevada Constitution, Article
Nevada’s state constitution authorizes 19 § 2)
citizens to call a statewide referendum
Distribution Requirement—½ point deducted
— or People’s Veto — by petition, per-
Nevada requires that petition sponsors collect signatures
mitting citizens to then either approve
equal to 10 percent of the turnout in the most recent
or reject laws passed by the legislature.
election in each of the state’s Congressional districts, in
Nevada receives two points. (Nevada
addition to 10 percent statewide (see note below). This
Constitution, Article 19 § 1)
distribution requirement adds to the difficulty of qualify-
Local Initiative—3 points ing an initiative and significantly increases the cost of
Residents of Nevada municipalities petitioning. (Nevada Revised Statutes, Chapter 239
have access to local initiative and refer- §3.2)
endum. The state receives a point for its
local initiative and referendum proc- *Nevada Senate Bill 212, which took effect on June 4, 2009, re-
quires the Legislature to create petition districts from which signa-
esses and two additional points because tures for an initiative petition must be gathered. Section 14 of this
the local initiative is available to most bill defines “petition district” to mean congressional district until
Nevada citizens. July 1, 2011, at which time the Legislature is required to have estab-
lished special petition districts.
New Mexico’s
Initiative &
Referendum Rights
Restrictions on
New Mexico’s
Referendum—1 point
New Mexico’s state constitution
Initiative &
authorizes citizens to call a statewide Referendum Rights
referendum — or People’s Veto — Distribution Requirement
by petition, permitting citizens to —½ point deducted
then either approve or reject some New Mexico requires that, in addition to
acts passed by the legislature. New gathering signatures of 10 percent of
Mexico receives only one point due votes cast in the last general election,
to the restrictive nature of the state’s supporters must gather signatures in
referendum process. In nearly 100 three fourths of the counties. This
years, since 1912, only two statewide distribution requirement adds to the dif-
referendums have made the ballot. ficulty of qualifying a referendum and
(New Mexico Constitution, Article significantly increases the cost of peti-
IV §1) tioning. (New Mexico Constitution, Ar-
Local Initiative—3 points ticle IV §1)
Residents of New Mexico munici-
palities have access to local initiative
and referendum. The state receives
one point for its local initiative and
referendum processes and two addi-
tional points because the local
initiative process is available to most
New Mexicans. (New Mexico
Constitution, Article IV §1)
Dakota
North Dakota citizens enjoy the right to propose constitutional amendments and state laws by petition,
and to call a People’s Veto (a statewide referendum) on laws passed by the legislature. In order to place a
constitutional amendment on the ballot, citizens must collect the signatures of registered voters equal to
4 percent of the population at the last federal census — currently 25,659.
North Dakota’s
Initiative &
Referendum Rights
Constitutional Amendment—3 points
Restrictions on North Dakota’s
North Dakota’s state constitution author- Initiative & Referendum Rights
izes citizens to propose constitutional Residency Requirement—1 point deducted
amendments by petition. North Dakota North Dakota bans non-residents from gathering
receives three points. (North Dakota petition signatures for initiatives and referendums.
Constitution, Article III §1) This prevents proponents from hiring the best
Statutory Initiative—3 points qualified people, making it more difficult to meet
North Dakota’s state constitution author- the signature requirements to qualify a measure for
izes citizens to propose simple statutes by the ballot. While North Dakota’s law has been chal-
petition. North Dakota received three lenged and upheld by the federal Eighth Circuit,
points. (North Dakota Constitution, Arti- similar residency requirements in other states have
cle III §1) been more recently struck down as unconstitutional
violations of citizens’ First Amendment rights.
Referendum—2 points (North Dakota Constitution, Article III §3)
North Dakota’s state constitution author-
Pay-Per-Signature Ban—1 point deducted
izes citizens to call a statewide referen-
dum — or People’s Veto — by petition, North Dakota bans paying campaign workers who
permitting citizens to then either approve help collect signatures on a ballot initiative, refer-
or reject laws passed by the legislature. endum or recall petition by the number of signa-
North Dakota receives two points. (North tures they collect. While North Dakota’s law has
Dakota Constitution, Article III §1) been challenged and upheld by the federal Eighth
Circuit, similar bans have more recently been ruled
Local Initiative—1 point unconstitutional. (North Dakota Statutes, Title 16.1
Residents of some North Dakota munici- §01-12-11)
palities have access to local initiative and
referendum. The state receives a point for
its local initiative and referendum proc-
esses.
Eliminate Restrictions
Allow people from outside of North Dakota to help North Dakotans petition their government: Re-
pealing the requirement that in order to circulate petitions one must be a resident of North Dakota would
give the state an additional point. (North Dakota Constitution, Article III §3)
Ease restrictions on paid circulators: North Dakota could gain a point by repealing its ban on paying
campaign workers on petition drives by the number of signatures they collect. (North Dakota Statutes,
Title 16.1 §01-12-11)
Ohio’s Initiative
& Referendum Rights
Constitutional Amendment
—3 points
Restrictions on Ohio’s
Initiative & Referendum Rights
Ohio’s state constitution authorizes citi- High Signature Requirement for Constitu-
zens to propose constitutional amend- tional Amendment—½ point deducted
ments by petition. Ohio receives three High signature requirements make it very diffi-
points. (Ohio Constitution, Article II cult to qualify an initiative or referendum for the
§2.01) ballot, and fall especially hard on grassroots vol-
Statutory Initiative—3 points unteer efforts. Because Ohio’s signature
Ohio’s state constitution authorizes citi- requirement is above 8 percent of the number of
zens to propose simple statutes by peti- votes cast in the last election for governor, a half
tion. Ohio receives three points. (Ohio point was deducted.
Constitution Article II §2.01) Distribution Requirement—½ point deducted
Referendum—2 points Ohio requires that, in addition to gatherings sig-
Ohio’s state constitution authorizes citi- natures of registered voters equaling 10 percent
zens to call a statewide referendum — or of the last vote for governor for a constitutional
People’s Veto — by petition, permitting amendment and 6 percent for a statute, petition
citizens to then either approve or reject signatures equaling 5 percent for an amendment
laws passed by the legislature. Ohio re- and 1.5 percent for a statute must also be gath-
ceives two points. (Ohio Constitution ered from 44 of the 88 counties in the state. This
Article II §2.01) distribution requirement adds to the difficulty of
qualifying an initiative and significantly increases
Local Initiative—3 points the cost of petitioning.
Residents of Ohio municipalities have
access to local initiative and referendum.
The state receives a point for its local
initiative and referendum processes and
two additional points because the local
initiative is available to most Ohioans.
Additional Notes
Ohio law requires that proponents of a referendum submit a summary of the referendum, along with
1,000 initial signatures, prior to collecting signatures. The Secretary of State then has ten days to approve
the summary and verify the signatures, the Attorney General then has another ten days to approve the
summary. This takes 20 days off of the 90 given by the constitution to collect signatures on a referendum
petition, effectively robbing the people of nearly a third of their constitutionally allotted petitioning time.
In addition, the Attorney General may reject the summary, starting the process over and taking off an-
other 20 days. Currently this process is under legal challenge by Citizens in Charge, a sister organization
of Citizens in Charge Foundation, in the case Citizens in Charge v Brunner.
sors need ample time to collect the tens of thou-
sands of signatures needed to qualify, and Okla-
Oklahoma’s Initiative & homa’s short five-month period does not allow
Referendum Rights enough time.
Constitutional Amendment—3 points Insufficient Circulation Period for
Oklahoma’s state constitution authorizes citi- Constitutional Amendments—1 point deducted
zens to propose constitutional amendments by Oklahoma petition sponsors have only 90 days to
petition. Oklahoma receives three points. collect the required number of signatures to qualify
(Oklahoma Constitution, Article V §2) a constitutional amendment for the ballot. Petition
Statutory Initiative—3 points sponsors need ample time to collect the tens of
thousands of signatures needed to qualify, and
Oklahoma’s state constitution authorizes citi-
Oklahoma’s short 90-day period does not allow
zens to propose simple statutes by petition.
enough time. (Oklahoma Statutes, §34-4)
Oklahoma received three points. (Oklahoma
Constitution, Article V §2) High Signature Requirement (Constitutional
Referendum—2 points Amendments)—1 point deducted
Oklahoma’s state constitution authorizes citi- High signature requirements make it very difficult
zens to call a statewide referendum — or to qualify an initiative or referendum for the ballot,
People’s Veto — by petition, permitting citi- and fall especially hard on grassroots volunteer
zens to then either approve or reject laws efforts. Because Oklahoma’s signature requirement
passed by the legislature. Oklahoma receives is above 10 percent of the number of votes cast for
two points. (Oklahoma Constitution, Article V governor in the last election, a point was deducted.
§2) High Signature Requirement (Statutory
Local Initiative—3 points Initiatives)—½ point deducted
Residents of Oklahoma municipalities have High signature requirements make it very difficult
access to local initiative and referendum. The to qualify an initiative or referendum for the ballot,
state receives a point for its local initiative and fall especially hard on grassroots volunteer
and referendum processes and two additional efforts. Because Oklahoma’s signature requirement
points because the local initiative is available is above 5 percentage of the number of votes cast
to most Oklahomans. for governor in the last election, a half point was
deducted.
Additional Notes
Oklahoma ranks among the toughest states to qualify an initiative for the ballot, with the nation’s highest
signature requirement and second shortest circulation period. A proposed expansion of the petition period
overwhelmingly passed the state legislature in 2009, but was vetoed by the governor. That same year a
bill passed that moves the process for challenging the ballot title for an initiative to before signatures are
collected, instead of afterward. Additionally, legislators placed a constitutional amendment on the ballot
in 2010 allowing voters to decide whether to tie the number of signatures needed to the last election for
Governor. Currently the number is tied to the highest office in the preceding elections, which resulted in a
37 percent increase in the number of signatures needed after the 2008 presidential election.
Eliminate Restrictions
Ease restrictions on paid circulators: Oregon could gain one point by repealing its ban on paying cam-
paign workers according to the number of signature they collect. (Oregon Constitution, Article IV §1b)
South Dakota citizens enjoy the right to propose constitutional amendments and state laws by petition,
and to call a People’s Veto (a statewide referendum) on laws passed by the legislature. In order to place a
constitutional amendment on the ballot, citizens must collect the signatures of registered voters equal to
10 percent of the votes cast for governor in the last statewide election — currently 33,553.
South Dakota’s
Initiative &
Referendum Rights
Constitutional Amendment—3 points
Restrictions on South Dakota’s
Initiative & Referendum Rights
High Signature Requirement (Constitutional
South Dakota’s state constitution authorizes
citizens to propose constitutional amend- Initiatives)—½ point deducted
ments by petition. South Dakota receives High signature requirements make it very difficult
three points. (South Dakota Constitution, to qualify an initiative or referendum for the ballot,
Article III §1) and fall especially hard on grassroots volunteer
efforts. Because South Dakota’s signature
Statutory Initiative—3 points requirement is above 8 percent of votes cast for
South Dakota’s state constitution authorizes governor in the last election, half a point was
citizens to propose simple statutes by peti- deducted. (South Dakota Constitution, Article
tion. South Dakota received three points. XXIII §1)
(South Dakota Constitution, Article III §1)
Residency Requirement—1 point deducted
Referendum—2 points South Dakota bans non-residents from gathering
South Dakota’s state constitution authorizes petition signatures for initiatives and referendums.
citizens to call a statewide referendum — or This prevents proponents from hiring the best
People’s Veto — by petition, permitting qualified people, making it more difficult to meet
citizens to then either approve or reject laws the signature requirements to qualify a measure for
passed by the legislature. South Dakota re- the ballot. Similar residency requirements in other
ceives two points. (South Dakota states have been struck down as unconstitutional
Constitution Article III §1) violations of citizens’ First Amendment rights.
Local Initiative—3 points Pay-Per-Signature Ban—1 point deducted
Residents of South Dakota municipalities South Dakota bans paying campaign workers who
have access to local initiative and referen- help collect signatures on a ballot initiative, refer-
dum. The state receives a point for its local endum or recall petition according to the number of
initiative and referendum processes and two signatures they collect. Similar bans have been
additional points because the local initiative ruled unconstitutional in five states. (South Dakota
is available to most South Dakotans. Code, 12-13-28)
Eliminate Restrictions
Allow people from outside of South Dakota to help South Dakotans petition their government: Re-
pealing the requirement that in order to circulate petitions one must be a resident of South Dakota, would
give South Dakota an additional point.
Ease restrictions on paid circulators: South Dakota could gain a point by repealing its ban on paying
people who circulate the petition according to the number of signatures they collect. (South Dakota Code,
12-13-28)
Additional Notes
In 2009, the South Dakota legislature moved the date to turn in petition signatures from June to May, ef-
fectively permitting initiative proponents less time to organize an initiative campaign and collect the nec-
essary signatures to access the ballot.
68
Utah
Utah citizens enjoy the right to propose state laws
C-
Score: 5.5
by petition, and to call a People’s Veto (a state-
wide referendum) on laws passed by the legisla-
ture. In order to place a state law on the ballot,
citizens must collect the signatures of registered
voters equal to 10 percent of the votes cast for
governor in the last statewide election — currently
94,652. Utah citizens have no initiative process to
propose amendments to the state constitution.
Utah’s Restrictions on Utah’s
Initiative &
Referendum
Initiative & Referendum Rights
High Signature Requirement for Statutory Initia-
Rights tives—1 point deducted
High signature requirements make it very difficult to
Statutory Initiative—3 points
qualify an initiative or referendum for the ballot, and fall
Utah’s state constitution authorizes
especially hard on grassroots volunteer efforts. Because
citizens to propose simple statutes
Utah signature requirement is above 8 percent of votes
by petition. Utah receives three
cast for governor in the last election, one point was
points. (Utah Constitution, Article
deducted. (Utah Code, 20A-7-201)
VI §1(A))
Distribution Requirement—½ point deducted
Referendum—2 points
Utah requires that, in addition to gathering signatures of
Utah’s state constitution authorizes
10 percent of voters from the last statewide election, for
citizens to call a statewide referen-
direct initiatives, proponents must gather 10 percent of the
dum — or People’s Veto — by peti-
vote cast in at least 20 of the 29 counties. For indirect
tion, permitting citizens to then ei-
initiatives, proponents must gather 5 percent in at least 20
ther approve or reject laws passed
of 29 counties. This distribution requirement adds to the
by the legislature. Utah receives two
difficulty of qualifying an initiative and significantly in-
points. (Utah Constitution, Article
creases the cost of petitioning. (Utah Code, 20A-7-201)
VI §1(B))
Residency Requirement—1 point deducted
Local Initiative—3 points
Utah bans non-residents from gathering petition signa-
Residents of Utah municipalities
tures for initiatives and referendums. This prevents pro-
have access to local initiative and
ponents from hiring the best qualified people, making it
referendum. The state receives a
more difficult to meet the signature requirements to qual-
point for its local initiative and ref-
ify a measure for the ballot. Similar residency require-
erendum processes and two addi-
ments in other states have been struck down as unconsti-
tional points because the local
tutional violations of citizens’ First Amendment rights.
initiative is available to most Uta-
(Utah Code, 20A-7-202(2)(i))
hans. (Utah Constitution, Article VI
§1(B)(b))
Eliminate Restrictions
Count each signature equally: Repealing the requirement that signatures be gathered from 20 of the 29
counties in the state and allowing voters from any part of the state to sign the petition on equal footing,
would give Utah an additional half point. (Utah Code, 20A-7-201)
Allow people from outside of Utah to help Utahans petition their government: Repealing the
requirement that in order to circulate petitions one must be a resident of Utah, would give Utah an addi-
tional point. (Utah Code, 20A-7-202(2)(i))
Additional Notes
The Utah constitution requires that any initiated legislation to allow, limit, or prohibit the taking of wild-
life or the season for or method of taking wildlife must get the approval of two-thirds of those voting on
the measure to pass. (Utah Constitution, Article VI §1(B)ii)
Washington citizens enjoy the right to propose state laws by petition, and to call a People’s Veto (a state-
wide referendum) on laws passed by the legislature. In order to place a state law on the ballot, citizens
must collect the signatures of registered voters equal to 8 percent of the votes cast in the last election for
governor — currently 240,228. Washingtonians have no process to propose amendments to their state
constitution by petition.
Washington’s
Initiative &
Referendum
Rights
Restrictions on Washington’s
Statutory Initiative—3 points Initiative & Referendum Rights
Washington’s state constitution
authorizes citizens to propose sim- Insufficient Circulation Period—½ point deducted
ple statutes by petition. Washington Washington petition sponsors have only six months to collect
receives three points. (Washington the required number of signatures to qualify an initiative or
Constitution, Article II § 1(a)) referendum for the ballot. Petition sponsors need ample time
to collect the tens of thousands of signatures needed to qual-
Referendum—2 points ify, and Washington’s short six month period does not allow
Washington’s state constitution enough time. We deducted half a point from Washington’s
authorizes citizens to call a statewide score because it does not give citizens enough time to circu-
referendum — or People’s Veto — late a petition. (Washington Constitution, Article II § 1(a))
by petition, permitting citizens to
then either approve or reject laws High Signature Requirement for Statutory
passed by the legislature. Washington Initiatives—½ point deducted
receives two points. (Washington High signature requirements make it very difficult to qualify
Constitution, Article II § 1(b)) an initiative or referendum for the ballot, and fall especially
hard on grassroots volunteer efforts. Because Washington’s
Local Initiative—3 points signature requirement is above 5 percent of the number of
Residents of municipalities have votes cast for governor in the last election, a half point was
access to local initiative and refer- deducted. (Washington Constitution, Article II § 1(a))
endum. The state receives a point
for its local initiative and referen-
dum processes and two additional
points because the local initiative is
available to most Washingtonians.
Additional Notes
The United States Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case over whether Washington’s public informa-
tion disclosure law applies to voter signatures on a petition. A group opposing a 2009 referendum sought
to publish the names of those who had signed petitions on the Internet, with the ostensible purpose of
allowing people to contact them and confront their viewpoint. Referendum supporters feared signers
would be harassed for their position on the issue and argued that petition signers had a right to be anony-
mous. The case is Doe v. Reed.
Restrictions on Wyoming’s
Wyoming’s Initiative & Referendum Rights
Initiative &
Referendum
High Signature Requirement (Statutory Initiatives)
—1 point deducted
Rights High signature requirements make it very difficult to qualify
an initiative or referendum for the ballot, and fall especially
Statutory Initiative—3 points hard on grassroots volunteer efforts. Because Wyoming’s
Wyoming’s state constitution signature requirement is above 8 percent of those who voted
authorizes citizens to propose sim- in the preceding general election, one point was deducted.
ple statutes by petition. Wyoming (Wyoming Constitution, 97-3-052 (c)(i))
receives three points. (Wyoming
Constitution, 97-3-052 (a)) Distribution Requirement—½ point deducted
Wyoming requires that, in addition to gathering signatures of 15
Referendum—2 points* percent of voters from the last statewide election, petition signa-
Wyoming’s state constitution author- tures must also be gathered from at least two-thirds of the coun-
izes citizens to call a statewide refer- ties in the State. This distribution requirement adds to the diffi-
endum — or People’s Veto — by culty of qualifying an initiative and significantly increases the
petition, permitting citizens to then cost of petitioning. (Wyoming Constitution, 97-3-052 (c)(ii))
either approve or reject laws passed
by the legislature. Wyoming receives Residency Requirement—1 point deducted
two points. (Wyoming Constitution, Wyoming bans non-residents from gathering petition signa-
97-3-052 (a)) tures for initiatives and referendums. This prevents propo-
nents from hiring the best qualified people, making it more
Local Initiative—0 points difficult to meet the signature requirements to qualify a
Residents of Wyoming municipali- measure for the ballot. Similar residency requirements in
ties have no access to local initiative other states have been struck down as unconstitutional viola-
and referendum. tions of citizens’ First Amendment rights. (Wyoming Stat-
________ utes, 22-24-107(a))
*Wyoming is the only state in which sub-
mission of sufficient signatures for a refer- Pay-Per-Signature Ban—1 point deducted
endum does not stay the legislation that is Wyoming bans paying campaign workers who help collect
being placed before voters. This means that
statutes without popular support can go into signatures on a ballot initiative, referendum or recall petition
effect, even if the impact might be irrepara- by the number of signatures they collect. Similar bans have
ble. been ruled unconstitutional. (Wyoming Statutes 22-24-
125(a))
District of Columbia’s
Initiative & Referendum Rights
Initiative &
Referendum Rights
Residency Requirement—1 point deducted
The District of Columbia bans non-residents from gath-
Statutory Initiative—3 points ering petition signatures for initiatives and referendums.
The District of Columbia’s Charter author- This prevents proponents from hiring the best qualified
izes citizens to propose simple statutes people, making it more difficult to meet the signature
through the petition process. The District requirements to qualify a measure for the ballot. Similar
of Columbia receives three points. (District residency requirements in various states have been
of Columbia Code, § 1-1001.16(a)(1)) struck down as unconstitutional violations of citizens’
First Amendment rights. (District of Columbia Code, §
Referendum—2 points
1-1001.16(h)(5))
The District of Columbia’s charter author-
izes citizens to call a district-wide referen- Distribution Requirement—½ point deducted
dum — or People’s Veto — by petition, In addition to gathering petition signatures from 5 per-
permitting citizens to then either approve cent of registered voters, the District of Columbia re-
or reject any act passed by the council. The quires that signatures must come from five of the eight
District of Columbia receives two points. wards in the city. This distribution requirement adds to
(District of Columbia Code, § the difficulty of qualifying an initiative and significantly
1-1001.16(a)(1)) increases the cost of petitioning. (District of Columbia
Code, § 1-1001.16(i))
Local Initiative—1 point
Because of the unique status of the District Insufficient Circulation Period for District
of Columbia and the fact that the District Initiatives—½ point deducted
has only one municipality — Washington District of Columbia petition sponsors have only 180
— the local initiative process is essentially days to collect the required number of signatures to
the same as the district-wide initiative _________
process. For comparison purposes, we * The exact number of petition signatures needed is impossible to calculate
awarded the District of Columbia one prior to turning in petitions, as it depends on the number of registered voters
on the district’s rolls in the future—that is, at the time the signatures are sub-
point under local initiative. (District of mitted. Because lists of registered voters constantly change, as well as being
notoriously out-of-date, Citizens in Charge Foundation urges setting petition
Columbia Code § 1-1001.16(a)(1)) requirements on a percentage of the last vote for mayor (or other districtwide
office) rather than a percentage of registered voters.
Additional Notes
The power of the initiative process in the District of Columbia is severely limited by the fact that the
United State Congress has the power to unilaterally keep measures off the district ballot and to invalidate
initiatives passed by the voters. Also, the Washington City Council has the power to repeal initiatives as
soon as they are passed by voters. Without protection from encroachment from these two bodies,
residents rights are very tenuous.