Latest stories

Illinois State Legislature refers 2020 ballot measure to allow for a graduated state income tax

By Ryan Byrne
In Ballot measures
May 30, 2019 at 6:36 PM

Since 1970, the Illinois Constitution has required the state personal income tax to be a flat rate. The Illinois State Legislature, with the support of Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D), passed legislation on May 27, 2019, to ask voters to repeal the requirement and instead allow for a graduated income tax by constitutional amendment.
 
Voters will decide the ballot measure on November 3, 2020. In Illinois, a ballot measure amending the state constitution requires either a 60 percent vote of those voting on the ballot measure or a simple majority vote of those voting in the election.
 
Gov. Pritzker and Democrats have named the proposal the Fair Tax, while Ideas Illinois, an organization opposed to the ballot measure, has called the proposal the Unfair Jobs Tax.
 
The ballot measure required 60 percent supermajorities in the state’s legislative chambers. Democrats control 68 percent (40 of 59) Senate seats and 63 percent (74 of 118) House seats, and were able to pass the constitutional amendment without Republican support. From 2016 to 2018, Democrats held majorities in the House and Senate but not enough seats to pass a constitutional amendment along partisan lines.
 
The ballot measure itself would not enact a graduated income tax, just allow for one. For income earned in 2018, the personal income tax in Illinois was a flat rate of 4.95 percent. The Illinois State Senate passed Senate Bill 687 (SB 687) on May 1, 2019, which would go into effect only if voters approve the constitutional amendment in 2020. SB 687 would change the state’s income tax from a flat rate to six graduated rates—ranging from 4.75 to 7.99 percent—beginning on January 1, 2021. The state House had not passed SB 687 as of May 27, 2019.
 
Ballotpedia has not identified political action committees (PACs) supporting or opposing the ballot measure; however, at least two 501(c)(4) nonprofit organizations were airing advertisements regarding the ballot measure. Think Big Illinois supported the legislation to place the constitutional amendment on the ballot. Quentin Fulks, a former campaign staffer for Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s (D) 2018 gubernatorial campaign is heading Think Big Illinois. Gov. Pritzker has donated to the organization but had no other involvement, according to Think Big Illinois spokesperson Lara Sisselman. Ideas Illinois opposed the legislation for the constitutional amendment. The Coalition for Jobs, Growth and Prosperity, which formed in 2004, organized Ideas Illinois. Greg Baise, former president of the Illinois Manufacturers Association, is leading the group.
 
House Speaker Michael Madigan (D-22) said, “Middle-class families bear too much of the burden under the current tax system, and a Fair Tax will enable us to make the wealthy pay their fair share to balance the budget and invest in critical resources like education and health care — all while providing relief for 97% of taxpayers.” House Minority Leader Jim Durkin (R-82) said his party “will continue to stand united against the majority part’s insatiable desire for higher taxes that has caused businesses and families to flee the state in droves.”
 
The ballot measure to allow for a graduated income tax will be the 23rd constitutional amendment that voters in Illinois have decided since adopting their current constitution in 1970. Fourteen of the 22 constitutional amendments were approved at the ballot box, while eight of them were rejected.
 


Acting Texas Secretary of State David Whitley (R) resigns

By Elisabeth Moore
In State
May 30, 2019 at 6:26 PM

Acting Texas Secretary of State David Whitley (R) resigned May 27 just before the end of the Texas legislative session. Whitley was appointed by Gov. Greg Abbott (R) on December 17, 2018, but needed to receive confirmation from two-thirds of the state Senate—21 out of 31 senators—to continue serving in a permanent capacity through 2021.
 
Whitley was supported by all 19 Republicans in the Senate, but all 12 Democrats announced their opposition to his confirmation earlier this year.
 
The secretary of state in Texas is appointed by the governor and confirmed by the state Senate, and Abbott will nominate Whitley’s replacement. The office of secretary of state exists in 47 states and is directly elected in 35 of them. Texas is one of nine states where the governor appoints the secretary of state; in three states, he or she is appointed by the state legislature. In 37 states, the secretary of state is the chief elections officer with ultimate oversight over state elections and voter registration.
 
Whitley thanked Abbott in his resignation letter, writing, “Thank you for giving me the opportunity to serve Texas. Working alongside the employees in the secretary of state’s office, county election officials, and representatives of our #1 trading partner, Mexico, has been my distinct honor and privilege.


Former U.S. Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) passes away

By Rob Oldham
In Federal
May 30, 2019 at 12:46 PM

Thad Cochran, a Republican senator from Mississippi from 1979 to 2018, passed away on May 30, 2019. He was 81 years old.
 
Cochran resigned from the Senate on April 1, 2018, citing health concerns. He was replaced by interim Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R), who later won a November 2018 special election to serve the rest of Cochran’s term through 2020. At the time of his resignation, Cochran was the 10th longest-serving senator in U.S. history.
 
Before his election to the Senate in 1978, Cochran had served in the U.S. House since 1973. Prior to his time in public office, he worked as an attorney in Mississippi and served in the U.S. Navy.


The Daily Brew: Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel (D) rules ballot measure distribution requirement unconstitutional

By Dave Beaudoin
In Newsletters
May 30, 2019 at 9:16 AM

The Daily Brew

Welcome to the Thursday, May 30, Brew. Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:

  1. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel (D) rules ballot measure distribution requirement unconstitutional
  2. Acting Texas Secretary of State David Whitley (R) resigns
  3. Join Ballotpedia for three upcoming webinars

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel (D) rules ballot measure distribution requirement unconstitutional

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel (D) issued a legal opinion last week stating that the distribution requirement and other provisions affecting the state’s initiative process passed in 2018 are unconstitutional. The attorney general’s opinion was requested by Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson (D), who would have been involved in the enforcement of the new initiative petition rules. Nessel’s opinion is binding on state officials unless a court ruling overturns it.

On December 31, 2018, Gov. Rick Snyder (R) signed Michigan House Bill 6595, which limited the number of ballot initiative petition signatures collected in any one congressional district to 15% of the total required. This limit effectively would require that petition signatures must be obtained from at least seven of the state’s 16 congressional districts. It also required that petitions disclose whether the petitioner is paid or volunteer and made other changes regarding petitioners, valid signatures, and the timeline for certification.

In the state Senate, 26 Republicans voted in favor of the bill, and one Republican joined all 11 Democrats in opposition. In the House, 56 Republicans were joined by one Democrat in voting to approve it. Five Republicans and 42 Democrats were opposed.

Besides Michigan, 16 other states have laws imposing distribution requirements that require that ballot measure petitions be signed by a minimum percentage of voters from different political subdivisions in order for the ballot measure to qualify for the ballot. This requirement can be based on a state’s counties, congressional districts, or state legislative districts.

Signature requirements by state

Nessel’s opinion stated that the distribution requirement provisions of HB 6595 imposed an additional obligation for qualifying an initiative for the ballot beyond what was required or authorized by the Michigan Constitution. She cited a 2018 Michigan Supreme Court ruling that held that the initiative and referendum rights “can be interfered with neither by the legislature, the courts, nor the officers charged with any duty in the premises.”

Rep. Jim Lower (R)—a sponsor of HB 6595—said to the Washington Post in response, “I don’t think anybody’s surprised. I disagree with the conclusions she has come to, and I think it will be litigated.” Lower argued that spreading signature gathering efforts out across more of the state is a common-sense requirement and demonstrates that a proposed initiative has broader support.

Michigan voters approved three citizen initiatives in 2018:

  • a marijuana legalization initiative;
  • a redistricting commission initiative; and
  • an initiative adding eight voting policies to the Michigan Constitution, including straight-ticket voting, automatic voter registration, same-day voter registration, and no-excuse absentee voting.

Michigan is currently under divided government as Republicans control both chambers of the state legislature and Gretchen Whitmer (D) is governor. In the 2018 elections, Democrats were elected governor, attorney general, and secretary of state—all offices held by Republicans going into 2018.

In the attorney general race, Nessel defeated Tom Leonard (R) and three other candidates to succeed Bill Schuette (R), who was term-limited. Nessel received 49.0% of the vote to Leonard’s 46.3%. In the secretary of state election, Benson defeated Mary Treder Lang (R) and two other candidates to succeed Ruth Johnson (R), who was also term-limited. Benson received 52.9% of the vote to Lang’s 44.0%.

Learn more

Acting Texas Secretary of State David Whitley (R) resigns

Acting Texas Secretary of State David Whitley (R) resigned May 27 just before the end of the Texas legislative session. Whitley was appointed by Gov. Greg Abbott (R) on December 17, 2018, but needed to receive confirmation from two-thirds of the state Senate—21 out of 31 senators—to continue serving in a permanent capacity through 2021.

Whitley was supported by all 19 Republicans in the Senate, but all 12 Democrats announced their opposition to his confirmation earlier this year.

The secretary of state in Texas is appointed by the governor and confirmed by the state Senate, and Abbott will nominate Whitley’s replacement. The office of secretary of state exists in 47 states and is directly elected in 35 of them. Texas is one of nine states where the governor appoints the secretary of state; in three states, he or she is appointed by the state legislature. In 37 states, the secretary of state is the chief elections officer with ultimate oversight over state elections and voter registration.

Whitley thanked Abbott in his resignation letter, writing, “Thank you for giving me the opportunity to serve Texas. Working alongside the employees in the secretary of state’s office, county election officials, and representatives of our #1 trading partner, Mexico, has been my distinct honor and privilege.”

Learn more

Join Ballotpedia for three upcoming webinars

As the calendar turns to June, I want to let you know about three upcoming Ballotpedia events for you to put on your calendar.

Next week I’ll be hosting a webinar with David Luchs—one of our staff writers—about the June 8 mayoral runoff elections in Dallas and San Antonio. We’ll also discuss why mayoral races matter and the significance of local elections. The webinar will take place on Tuesday, June 4, and will begin at noon ET.

Later in June, Sarah Rosier—you remember her as my Brew predecessor and our current Director of Outreach—will be conducting the next edition of our Ballotpedia Insights series. She’ll interview Dr. Stevan Hobfoll, the author of Tribalism: The Evolutionary Origins of Fear Politics, to discuss how the political environment has changed and what instigated these shifts. I always learn something new at these Ballotpedia Insights sessions, so I hope you’ll make plans to join us. It will begin on June 20 at 1 p.m. ET.

We’ve scheduled the August edition of Ballotpedia Insights as well. Sarah will be joined by Adam Probolsky of Probolsky Research to discuss the state of market and opinion research on elections and public policy. That session will be held on August 7 and start at 1 p.m. ET.

You can sign up for free and find more information about these interesting and informative webinars at the link below. I hope you’ll make plans to attend!

Learn more



Alabama voters will decide in 2020 whether or not the state legislature may recompile the state constitution

By Jackie Mitchell
In Ballot measures
May 28, 2019 at 6:36 PM
In Alabama, a 2020 ballot measure would, if approved, authorize the state legislature to recompile the state constitution during its 2022 regular session and also provide for its ratification.
 
According to the text of the proposed amendment, authorized changes to the constitution would include:
 
  • arranging it in proper articles, parts, and section;
  • removing all racist language;
  • delete duplicative and repealed provisions;
  • consolidate provisions regarding economic development; and
  • arrange all local amendments by county of application.
 
The amendment was introduced as House Bill 328 by Rep. Merika Coleman (D-57) on April 3, 2019. On April 25, the state House passed the amendment unanimously (101-0) with three representatives (two Republicans and one Democrat) absent or not voting. The measure was then amended and passed in the state Senate unanimously (30-0) with five senators (three Republicans and two Democrats) absent or not voting. On May 23, the state House concurred with the state Senate’s amendments and approved the bill unanimously (97-0) with seven representatives (four Republicans and three Democrats) absent or not voting.
 
As of May 28, one other constitutional amendment is on the ballot to be decided by Alabama voters in 2020. That measure would revise multiple sections of the state constitution concerning the state judiciary, including removing the authority of the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court to hire the administrative director of courts and instead giving that authority to the Alabama Supreme Court as a whole.
 
A total of 95 measures appeared on statewide ballots in Alabama from 1997 to 2018. During that time, the number of measures on the statewide ballot during even-numbered years ranged from four to 15. Between 1997 and 2018, about 81% (72 of 89) of the total number of measures that appeared on statewide ballots during even-numbered years were approved, and about 19% (17 of 89) were defeated.
 


Who is on the bubble to qualify for the first Democratic presidential primary debate?

By Emily Aubert
In Federal
May 28, 2019 at 6:31 PM
The first set of Democratic presidential primary debates is a month away and 20 presidential candidates have met the polling or fundraising criteria to qualify. If any additional candidates qualify, the Democratic National Committee will use a series of tiebreakers to determine who keeps their spot on the stage and who is removed. The debates will take place on June 26 and June 27 in Miami, Florida.
 
First priority will go to candidates who have reached both the polling and fundraising thresholds. Next up will be candidates with the highest polling average. The final tiebreaker will be candidates with the highest number of contributors.
 
Thirteen candidates have met both the polling and fundraising requirements, likely locking in their spots on the stage:
 
• Joe Biden
• Cory Booker
• Pete Buttigieg
• Julián Castro
• Tulsi Gabbard
• Kamala Harris
• Jay Inslee
• Amy Klobuchar
• Beto O’Rourke
• Bernie Sanders
• Elizabeth Warren
• Marianne Williamson
• Andrew Yang
 
Seven candidates have met the polling requirements only:
 
• Bill de Blasio
• Steve Bullock
• John Delaney
• Kirsten Gillibrand
• John Hickenlooper
• Tim Ryan
• Eric Swalwell
 
The four candidates who have not yet qualified by any method—Michael Bennet, Mike Gravel, Wayne Messam, and Seth Moulton—will have until June 12 to do so.
 
There has been some debate over whether de Blasio’s performance in a Reuters poll released earlier this month gave him the third and final poll he needed to qualify.
 
FiveThirtyEight elections analyst Geoffrey Skelley, who counts the poll as qualifying, said the Democratic National Committee (DNC) will be “’using the top-line number listed in the original public release from the approved sponsoring organization/institution’ for what it’s counting and the first column in the [Reuters] poll has de Blasio at 1%. The Reuters story also lists those figures.”


Countdown: with 161 days until election, 15 ballot measures are certified to appear on 2019 state ballots in four states

By Jackie Mitchell
In Ballot measures
May 28, 2019 at 6:26 PM
As of May 28, 2019, 15 statewide ballot measures were certified for 2019 ballots in four states. Fourteen were referred to voters by their state legislature and one was qualified for the ballot by a citizen initiative petition. Measures can still be added or removed from 2019 ballots.
 
Four of the 26 states with a process for citizen-initiated measures allow for ballot initiatives or veto referendums in any odd-numbered year: Colorado, Maine, Ohio, and Washington.
 
These four states also allow legislatively referred measures in odd years. Other states that tend to feature legislatively referred statewide measures in odd-numbered years include Louisiana, New Jersey, New York, and Texas.
 
About 50 potential ballot measures in seven states could appear on state ballots in 2019 if (for citizen initiatives) signature requirements and deadlines are met; or if (for legislatively referred measures) state legislatures give final approval before they adjourn.
 
Upcoming signature deadlines for citizen initiatives include:
  • Ohio: July 3, 2019
  • Washington: July 5, 2019
  • Colorado: August 5, 2019
 
In odd-numbered years from 2007 to 2017, about 33 statewide measures were on the ballot in 8 states, on average.
 
A seven-decade record for the lowest number of statewide ballot measure certifications was set in 2017, continuing a general trend toward fewer statewide measures. The last year in which there were fewer than 27 statewide measures was 1947.
 
Additional reading:


Iowa Supreme Court upholds changes to public-sector collective bargaining rights

By Jerrick Adams
In Uncategorized
May 28, 2019 at 3:46 PM
In two separate rulings issued on May 17, 2019, the Iowa Supreme Court upheld a 2017 law that amended collective bargaining rights for the state’s public-sector workforce. The court ruled 4-3 in the state’s favor in both cases.
 
What was at issue? In 2017, then-Gov. Terry Branstad (R) signed into law a series of amendments to Iowa’s public-sector labor relations law. As a result, collective bargaining units with less than 30 percent public-safety personnel (defined generally as firefighters and police officers) cannot negotiate insurance, hours, vacations, holidays, overtime, and health and safety issues unless their employers elect to do so. Collective bargaining units exceeding the 30-percent threshold are exempted from these restrictions.
 
Who were the parties to the suits? The plaintiffs, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Council 61 (AFSCME Council 61) and the Iowa State Education Association (ISEA), argued the amendments violated their equal protection and associational rights under the state constitution. The defendants were the state of Iowa and the Iowa Public Employment Relations Board. Both cases were filed in state district courts, which ruled against the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs appealed these decisions to the state supreme court.
 
How did the court rule? In each case, the court ruled 4-3 in the state’s favor. In the majority opinion covering both cases, Justice Thomas Waterman wrote: “The 2017 amendments do not infringe on a fundamental right of association. The plaintiffs ‘come to use with a problem suitable only for political solution.’ The plaintiffs are free to attempt to persuade public employers, such as the State and local governments and school boards, to voluntarily bargain over formerly mandatory terms. The plaintiffs otherwise must look to the ballot box and the elected branches to change this lawfully enacted statute.” Justices Susan Christensen, Edward Mansfield, and Christopher McDonald joined Waterman’s opinion.
 
Chief Justice Mark Cady and Justices Brent Appel and David Wiggins dissented. In his dissent, Cady wrote: “[The] Iowa statute ends up treating many similarly situated public employees in Iowa differently based solely on the bargaining unit they belong to and not for the reason the constitution would justify different treatment of public employees. Our constitution requires laws to treat similarly situated people equally unless there is an adequate reason otherwise. In this case, the overinclusiveness and underinclusiveness written into the statute drowned this reason out.”
 
What are the responses? Senate Majority Leader Jack Whitver (R) supported the ruling: “Since its implementation, I have heard story after story of school districts and local governments implementing creative solutions to improve the education of Iowa’s students and the provision of services Iowans need. This reform is about returning power to locally elected officials and giving them the ability to pay more to great teachers and employees, fire the occasional bad actor and protect Iowa taxpayers.”
 
Senate Minority Leader Janet Petersen (D) opposed the ruling: ” By taking away the rights of teachers, firefighters, nurses, correctional officers and other public servants, Republican politicians have done harm to all Iowa workers. Working Iowa men and women are the real victims of the assault by the Branstad/Reynolds administration and Republican-controlled Legislature.”
 
The case names and numbers are AFSCME Council 61 v. Iowa (No. 17–1841) and Iowa State Education Association v. Iowa (No. 17-1834).
 


Federal Register weekly update; 2019 page total trails 2018 total by 34 pages

By Caitlin Styrsky
In Federal
May 28, 2019 at 3:41 PM
The Federal Register is a daily journal of federal government activity that includes presidential documents, proposed and final rules, and public notices. It is a common measure of an administration’s regulatory activity.
 
During the week of May 20 to May 24, the number of pages in the Federal Register increased by 1,670 pages, bringing the year-to-date total to 24,362 pages. This week’s Federal Register featured a total of 637 documents, including 503 notices, 11 presidential documents, 46 proposed rules, and 77 final rules.
 
One proposed rules and one final rule were deemed significant under E.O. 12866—meaning that they may have large impacts on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. Significant actions may also conflict with presidential priorities or other agency rules.
 
During the same week in 2018, the number of pages in the Federal Register increased by 1,048 pages. As of May 24, the 2019 total trailed the 2018 total by 34 pages.
 
The Trump administration has added an average of 1,160 pages to the Federal Register each week in 2019 as of May 24. In 2018, the Trump administration added an average of 1,301 pages to the Federal Register each week. Over the course of the Obama administration, the Federal Register increased by an average of 1,658 pages per week.
 
According to government data, the Federal Register hit an all-time high of 95,894 pages in 2016.
 
Ballotpedia maintains page counts and other information about the Federal Register as part of its Administrative State Project. The project is a neutral, nonpartisan encyclopedic resource that defines and analyzes the administrative state, including its philosophical origins, legal and judicial precedents, and scholarly examinations of its consequences. The project also monitors and reports on measures of federal government activity.
 
 
Click below to find yearly information about additions to the Federal Register from 1936 to 2016: https://ballotpedia.org/Historical_additions_to_the_Federal_Register,_1936-2016


Cost-benefit analysis overhaul at EPA in response to Trump executive order

By Jace Lington
In Uncategorized
May 28, 2019 at 3:36 PM
Offices of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are formulating rules to clarify how they weigh the costs and benefits of potential regulations. These rules follow a May 13, 2019, memo from EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler saying that cost-benefit analyses have varied across the agency in the past and that new rules will promote more transparent and consistent processes.
 
Wheeler’s memo says that the EPA is standardizing its cost-benefit analysis practices in response to President Trump’s Executive Order 13777, which directed agencies to find regulations that impose higher costs than benefits. The memo lists the following guidelines for the new cost-benefit analysis rules:
 
• The EPA should measure and consider costs and benefits when making decisions
 
• The EPA should have consistent interpretations of terms like “practical,” “appropriate,” “reasonable,” and “feasible”
 
• The EPA should explain which factors go into regulatory analyses and how they are used to shape the outcome of regulations
 
• The EPA analyses should follow best practices and sound economic and scientific principles