Welcome to the Friday, May 2, Brew.
By: Briana Ryan
Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:
- Arkansas becomes the fifth state to ban foreign spending on ballot measures in 2025
- Beyond the Headlines Part Two: Navigating the Complex Reality of Local Election Administration, by Leslie Graves, Ballotpedia Founder and CEO
- A look at Texas’ May 3 local elections
Arkansas becomes the fifth state to ban foreign spending on ballot measures in 2025
Arkansas is the 14th state to pass a law prohibiting foreign spending in ballot measure campaigns and the fifth state to do so this year—a record for the most states enacting such laws in a single year. In previous years, no more than one state passed a similar law per year.
Arkansas House Bill 1837 (HB 1837) prohibits foreign nationals from donating directly or indirectly to ballot measure committees. It also requires these committees to affirm in campaign finance reports that they have not knowingly received contributions or expenditures from prohibited sources. The Arkansas House of Representatives passed the bill 87-5, and the Arkansas Senate passed it 34-0.
Thirteen other states have passed laws prohibiting foreign nationals or governments from contributing to ballot measure committees. California enacted the first such ban in 1997. Most of these bans happened within the past five years, with Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, and Wyoming enacting their bans in 2025.
Campaign finance rules for ballot measures differ from those for candidate elections. In 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that spending on ballot measure campaigns is similar to lobbying. In 2012, the Supreme Court affirmed that foreign nationals were prohibited from contributing to candidates under the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA). However, FECA “does not bar foreign nationals from issue advocacy,” which includes ballot measure campaigns. Following the court’s orders, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) has held that ballot measure campaigns are not regulated under FECA. According to the FEC, since ballot measure campaigns are similar to issue advocacy, foreign individuals, corporations, and governments can contribute to them.
Arkansas Secretary of State Cole Jester (R), who supports HB 1837, cited Hansjörg Wyss, a Swiss citizen living in Wyoming, as an example of a foreign national contributing to state ballot measure campaigns through an organization. Wyss has donated to the Sixteen Thirty Fund, which contributed at least $22.2 million to 10 campaigns supporting or opposing ballot measures related to abortion, minimum wage and sick leave, ranked-choice voting (RCV), and redistricting in 2024.
The 14 states that have passed laws banning foreign spending on ballot measure campaigns vary in how they define and restrict foreign entities. Some states use the federal definition of foreign principal or foreign national or similar definitions, where spending by foreign individuals, organizations, or governments is prohibited. In Maine and South Dakota, foreign governments, not foreign individuals, are prohibited from contributing to these campaigns.
Arkansas HB 1837 defines a foreign national as any of the following:
- a person who is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident
- a foreign government
- a foreign political party
- an entity organized under the laws of, or with a principal place of business in, a foreign country
So far, Arkansas voters will decide on four statewide ballot measures in 2026. In 2024, voters decided on two statewide ballot measures, both of which voters approved.
Three of the 14 states that enacted laws banning foreign spending on ballot measure campaigns did so through ballot measures: Colorado, Maine, and North Dakota.
In 2016, Missouri voters also approved Amendment 2 regarding multiple campaign finance rules. However, in May 2017, Judge Ortrie Smith of the U.S. District Court of Western Missouri ruled that sections of the ballot measure were unconstitutional, including one banning committees from accepting contributions from foreign corporations.
Click here for a closer look at laws governing foreign spending in ballot measure campaigns.
Beyond the Headlines Part Two: Navigating the Complex Reality of Local Election Administration
This week’s column is the second in a series in which I take you behind the scenes of our coverage of local elections and what we’re discovering about our nation’s democratic processes — and Ballotpedia itself — along the way.
This time, I’m looking at the complexity of local election administration and the web of rules and structures that make covering local races such an enormous challenge.
“Enormous challenge” isn’t an exaggeration. Anyone who has observed how local elections are run across the U.S. could come away with the impression that it’s amazing these elections happen at all.
That’s not because of any nefarious intent among local officials — far from it. Instead, this impression arises from the awareness of the sheer volume and complexity of these local elections and how vastly different they can be administered from state to state and even within individual jurisdictions.
Doug Kronaizl, who manages Ballotpedia’s Local Elections Project, told me about another issue with local election administration: the level of decentralization. Doug said his team initially expected most candidate information to be available at the state or county level. But in practice, thousands of local officials across the country are responsible for tasks like candidate filings.”
“In Texas, for example, every political subdivision — whether it’s a school district, municipality, or special district — has at least one person involved in running elections.”
This means we’ve had to find much of this information the old-fashioned way — through emails, phone calls, and extensive follow-up.
Much of the information to be collected does not actually exist on the internet. That’s a rare thing in today’s information age. AI and scrapers are all the rage, but you can’t teach AI to harvest something if it isn’t even out there.
That includes tracking down the right person to speak to about elections in a given jurisdiction. Doug said that such contacts are usually relatively easy to find, either through a county clerk or an auditor’s office. But those contacts can only take us so far.
“When we need to go more local, that’s when we start calling school districts to speak with superintendents’ secretaries, who have plenty of other things on their plates.”
And sometimes, contacting the right person about election information becomes an adventure all its own.
“We had some special districts in Wyoming where the public phone number was just a board member’s personal cell phone,” Doug said. “In these instances, we often have to leave a voicemail, because people tend to screen calls from unknown numbers.”
But sometimes, even the phones fail us.
“We’ve also encountered our share of unresponsive phone lines,” Doug said. “In one case, we couldn’t get anybody from the clerk’s office on the phone, so we called the county treasurer’s office and asked them to go to the clerk’s office and ask them to call us back. In another, we couldn’t reach a town hall, so we called the gas station next door and asked them to do the same thing. In both cases, we ended up getting the candidate information.”
Some might consider that and agree with my earlier statement: “It’s a wonder local elections happen at all.”
Others will look at this and see the genius of our electoral process: It’s decentralized, locally-controlled, and, while maybe not as tech savvy as some might wish, it’s still responsive to the needs of voters and researchers alike.
Doug said, “With each election, we learn more about how things work in a particular state — or even for a specific election date.” And most of all, Doug believes there’s reason for optimism about politics, elections, and Ballotpedia’s ability to cover it all. I’ll have more on that next week.
A look at Texas’ May 3 local elections
On the topic of local elections, on May 3—yes, a Saturday—Texas voters will head to the polls to decide on several local elections. Texas holds local elections twice per year, in May or November. Local law largely determines the exact date.
On May 3, we’re covering 2,053 elections with 4,747 candidates. Those elections will occur mostly in cities and school districts, with 909 city council elections, 779 school board elections, and 219 mayoral elections. Other offices include special districts governing areas like utilities, flood control, and ports.
There are also three elections to decide whether to create new cities and elect their initial officers. Those prospective cities are Bloomington (Victoria County), Hobbes (Blanco County), and Starbase (Cameron County), the last of which is notable as the location of SpaceX headquarters. In all three elections, the selection of officers depends on whether voters first approve the creation of the new cities.
Most elections are concentrated in the state’s more populous regions. Dallas and Tarrant Counties have the most upcoming local candidate elections, with 112 and 108, respectively.
Twenty-six counties have only a single candidate election on the ballot, and 26 others have no candidate elections. The map below shows where Texas voters will decide on candidates for local office.
In Texas, local subdivisions are largely responsible for administering their elections, but subdivisions may contract with the county to perform those services.
Uncontested elections are often canceled, and the sole candidate is elected. However, those candidates may still appear on the ballot if there are also other contested elections or questions on the ballot.
Of the 2,053 upcoming elections, 1,281 (62%) are contested, and 772 (38%) are uncontested. These totals do not include uncontested elections that were removed from the ballot entirely, meaning the actual number of uncontested elections is likely higher.
While voters will decide many races on May 3, certain offices require a majority vote. If no candidate receives more than 50% of the vote, the top two vote-getters will advance to a runoff election on June 7.
Texas is one of 26 states where we are providing comprehensive election coverage this year. Click here to view a list of other states we’re covering. For more information on our local election coverage in Texas this year, click here.