Groups opposing a constitutional amendment that will ensure the Utah Legislature can repeal or amend any future ballot initiative are outraged by the way the issue will be presented on voters’ ballots in November, calling the language a deceptive “lie” intended to “trick voters” into surrendering their constitutional rights.
As it was written by Utah Senate President Stuart Adams and House Speaker Mike Schutlz, the question put before voters is whether or not to “strengthen the initiative process” by prohibiting “foreign influence” on Utah ballot initiatives and “clarifying the voters and legislative bodies’ ability to amend laws.”
It is the description of the amendment “strengthening the initiative process” that has opponents upset, contending it minimizes what they say is actually a power grab by the Legislature that would strip voters of their constitutional right to run ballot initiatives.
Republican lawmakers changed the law earlier this year, taking the responsibility for writing the ballot language away from legislative attorneys and giving it to the House speaker and Senate president.
The description of the amendment comes as the ballots that will be sent to 1.7 million registered voters are now being printed and as a new study by The Utah Foundation reports that politicians ignoring voters is the second most important issue for residents — surpassed only by the cost of housing in the state.
The amendment was hastily approved by legislative Republicans during an emergency special session last month after five GOP-appointed Utah Supreme Court justices unanimously ruled in July that, in order for the citizen’s constitutional right to pass initiatives to have meaning, the Legislature cannot simply undo the intent of voters on a whim.
Legislators in the Republican supermajority argued that would create “super laws” that could not be changed and open up the state to a flood of outside interests wanting to change laws through ballot initiatives that would harm the state — although the court was explicit in its ruling that laws could be changed if there is a “compelling” reason or if the changes help to implement the will of voters.
Ryan Bell, a board member for the group Better Boundaries, which is spearheading opposition to the constitutional amendment, called the wording of the ballot measure “hopelessly slanted.”
“It is not true that this amendment will strengthen the initiative process; it will weaken that process,” he said in a statement. “It is not true that the amendment will establish requirements for the legislature to follow the intent of a ballot initiative; it will free them to override initiatives passed by the will of the people.”
Bell said the legislative leaders are compounding their unwillingness to engage with the public on the initiative issue “with ballot language that is likely to mislead the people,” and said his group and its allies will “ensure that the people of Utah see through these tactics.”
In a joint statement, Schultz and Adams said their objective is “to provide a straightforward and concise description to allow voters to easily understand the core of the proposed changes.”
“Additionally, voters always have access to comprehensive analysis and arguments both for and against the amendments,” they said. “Modeling previous ballot titles was our guide as we drafted this constitutional amendment. Those who label these efforts as deceptive are often the ones attempting to mislead voters.”
But critics of the ballot language include Republican lawmakers, like Bountiful Rep. Ray Ward, one of the nine Republicans who voted against the amendment.
“I believe that ballot language that has been written by them is deceptive and it incorrectly claims that the effect is to strengthen the initiative process when, to me, it seems the main purpose of the amendment is to seriously weaken the initiative process,” Ward said. “I think it reads like an advertisement for [the amendment] as opposed to neutral language. In the end, it will be on the voters to come to understand it and I hope there will be enough attention paid that they do understand it.”
Republican Provo Rep. Marsha Judkins, who also voted against the amendment, was surprised at the way the ballot question was worded, posting on X, “You have got to be kidding. What misleading language!”
Recalling her time on the school board, Judkins said, ballot questions put to the public had to be very clear and specific about what they did and what the impacts would be.
“For some reason I kind of thought that was the way it would go here,” she said. “Tell me how this strengthens the initiative process, that’s the part I don’t understand. To me it weakens it.”
“What this language says in this new constitutional amendment being proposed is, ‘We can repeal it,’” Judkins said. “This isn’t just changing it and trying to keep what voters have said through the initiative process. It’s actually repeal.”
State Sen. Nate Blouin, D-Millcreek, said that if voters approve the proposed amendment, the Legislature would make the citizens’ ability to reform government through the initiative meaningless.
“Now, they will print language on the ballot that can be described in no uncertain terms as a lie in an attempt to trick voters into voting against their own interests,” he said. “They will use millions of dollars flowing in from all corners of the nation to convince you that they know better. Let me tell you from experience: They don’t.”
Voter Initiative Amendment Language by Robert Gehrke on Scribd
The description written by Adams and Schultz is factually correct in that the constitutional amendment would attempt to prohibit foreign influence on initiatives. The term, however, is not defined in the amendment and Republican leaders don’t have any examples of foreign interests trying to influence Utah initiatives. When asked about foreign influence, Adams said they want to make sure it doesn’t happen here.
Other states that have enacted similar bans have done it through statute, rather than an amendment. Some have also argued that such bans are unconstitutional and would be struck down by the courts. In June, a lawsuit was filed challenging Ohio’s ban on foreign spending on ballot measures, and this week a federal judge blocked the law from taking effect, saying it was likely unconstitutional to ban green card holders — who can serve in the military, for example — from participating in the political process.
Ward said the foreign money ban is unenforceable since in the current campaign finance system special interests can donate dark money that never has to be reported.
Bell said that including the ban on foreign money in the amendment was nothing more than “a red herring more directed at scaring people than solving any actual problem.”
The ballot language written by Schultz and Adams also highlights two other bills approved by the Legislature — one that expands the time allowed for signature-gathering for voter referenda aimed at overturning a law passed by the Legislature, and another saying the Legislature should give “deference” to the intent of citizen initiatives — that would take effect if the amendment is approved.
The language requiring deference only applies to the general session immediately following the passage of an initiative and does not apply to any special legislative sessions.
Ward pointed out that in the two decades, the Legislature has passed 9,700 laws, while the public has passed three through the initiative process. That’s because it is difficult, with high signature thresholds and time and money needed to get one through.
“If you make that process so it can be overturned in a special session a week after you pass it, I don’t know who would have the stomach, and time and willpower to go out and put their shoulder to the wheel [to get it done],” he said.
A report released Wednesday by The Utah Foundation, a non-partisan think tank, identified politicians not listening to voters as a top issue among Democrats, Republicans and independents. It ranked just behind housing affordability among Utahns’ top priorities and ahead of inflation, government overreach, partisanship in politics and Utah’s water future.
In addition, polls have shown that the initiative process remains a popular tool among voters.
Earlier this year, a poll by the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center reported that 87% of Utahns said the Legislature should be required to enact ballot measures passed by voters. It found that 88% said legislators should not block, limit or reverse initiatives, and 93% say legislators have an obligation to carry out the will of the people if a majority approves an initiative.
Because the poll was conducted across multiple states, the Utah sample size was small, meaning it had a high margin of error, but the degree of support was overwhelming.
Updates: Sept. 4, 5:20 p.m. and Sept. 5, 11:40 a.m. • This story has been updated to include an interview with Republican Provo Rep. Marsha Judkins and subsequently to include the Legislature’s change to who writes the ballot language.