Your ballot likely will have fewer ballot measures in 2024. Here are some reasons why

Arizona could expect at least two ballot measures in 2024, fewer than the 10 voters decided in 2022, but the laws regulating those measures will be different this time around.

In 2022, Arizona voters approved two key changes in the rules.

One is Proposition 132, which will require any voter-approved law that creates a new tax to win 60% of the vote to take effect. The other is Proposition 129, which limits any voter-approved law to covering just one subject.

The people who supported these changes say they make the ballot-initiative process more fair for voters, while opponents say they simply make it harder for voters to have a say in the laws of the state.

In November 2024, Arizona voters are likely to see a ballot measure regarding abortion and another on transportation funding in Maricopa County. Neither of those is expected to be affected by the new laws, but the new laws could prevent activists from trying to get any other measures on the ballot, according to political experts.

Setting limits on what groups can pass at the ballot is OK with some lawmakers.

“We are kind of like a petri dish,” said Rep. Tim Dunn, R-Yuma. “People like to come in (to Arizona) with money from outside the state and try things.”

Dunn introduced a resolution in 2022 that lawmakers approved, Gov. Doug Ducey signed, and then became Proposition 132, which voters also approved.

Often, the groups trying to put items on the ballot are left-leaning and using the ballot measure approach to pass something the GOP-majority Arizona Legislature will not approve, such as recreational marijuana.

How can a measure get on a statewide ballot?

The state Constitution allows citizens, or, more often, interest groups, to put measures on the ballot if they gather signatures and file them with the secretary of state.

It requires signatures from 15% of qualified electors to put forward a proposed constitutional amendment and 10% to put forward a statutory amendment.

Because the number of voters changes over time, the signature requirements also increase with population and turnout. In 2024, it will require 383,923 signatures to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot and 255,949 signatures for statutory measures.

Groups putting measures on the ballot often have to gather significantly more signatures than the minimum required to ensure they have enough valid signatures from registered voters once the signatures are verified. Opponents of any given measure often target the signature sheets to try to get measures disqualified before they can come to a vote.

About half the states have a mechanism for voters to place changes in state law on the ballot.

In Arizona, they are a powerful tool because state law protects such voter-approved measures. In 1998, Arizona voters approved the Voter Protection Act. It prohibits lawmakers from changing measures passed by voters.

The measure was prompted by a dispute over medical marijuana, which voters approved but the Legislature later reversed.

The response was not only to approve medical marijuana once again at the ballot but also to pass the Voter Protection Act to ensure voters got the final word on such issues.

The strict wording of the act makes it challenging to alter voter-approved laws even when there is bipartisan agreement that a change is needed.

The Voter Protection Act says that the Legislature can amend voter-approved laws only if the changes further the purpose of the measures, and those changes also must receive support from 75% of the members in both chambers of the Legislature.

Big effort to protect abortion rights expected

The marquee ballot issue looming for 2024 will likely be a proposal ensuring women have the right to abortion in Arizona, after the Supreme Court’s action overturning the 50-year-old Roe v. Wade decision last year.

That is not a tax measure, and its brevity appears to ensure compliance with the new single-subject rule.“For reproductive rights, neither of the things that passed in 2022 are likely to impact that,” said Hannah Ledford, deputy executive director and campaigns director from the Fairness Project, a national nonprofit that works to pass ballot measures on issues such as increasing the minimum wage.

Another measure that Maricopa County voters will see will ask them whether to extend a half-cent sales tax that funds transportation projects, known as Proposition 400. Because that’s not a new tax and only affects the county, it does not appear to be affected by the new 60% rule.

That issue was referred to the ballot by lawmakers and signed by the governor, so it doesn’t need to gather signatures like the abortion measure will.

New ballot measure rules still concerning, and more likely coming

Just because the new rules don’t affect those two upcoming 2024 measures doesn’t mean groups like the Fairness Project are not concerned.

The nonprofit supported the 2016 measure raising the state minimum wage in Arizona, and a 2021 effort to do the same in Tucson. It opposed the referendums in 2022 that restricted ballot measures and supported Proposition 209, which lowers the maximum interest rates on medical debt and changes several rules on general consumer debt collection. It passed with more than 70% voter approval.

“The Fairness Project is really dedicated to fighting any attacks on the ballot measure process itself,” Ledford said.“I think Arizona is going to continue to make access to the ballot box harder than it is, and it already is really, really hard.”

Dunn said that one thing lawmakers, himself included, are considering, is a new requirement that would force people gathering signatures to place items on the ballot to gather some signatures from each legislative district.

He said lawmakers considered but have been advised by legal staff against a requirement for signatures to come from each county, so GOP lawmakers are likely to introduce a measure that would require signatures from legislative districts when they reconvene in January.

He said the intent is to prevent groups from outside Arizona from simply hiring signature gatherers to collect signatures in Maricopa County, which is more liberal than most rural areas, and get those items placed on the ballot.

Critics say this is just a way to make ballot measures more expensive and keep left-leaning policies off the ballot.

“It is not to make things harder,” Dunn countered. “It’s to make it equitable.”

Dunn said the existing system allows Maricopa County to have unwanted influence on residents in other counties.

“I’m from rural Arizona,” he said. “I represent the West Valley of Phoenix, but I have an understanding that we don’t want the city of Phoenix and Maricopa County to rule the state when it’s not in the best interest of the rest of the state.”

Ohio voters rejected just such a measure in August. So-called Issue 1 would have required a 60% supermajority approval for any constitutional amendment in the state, and also would have required signatures for such an amendment come from all of the state’s 88 counties.

The Republican-supported measure was seen largely as an effort to stave off any ballot measure to enshrine abortion rights in the state, even though the question didn’t directly address abortion.

Ledford said requirements to get signatures from every county or from multiple jurisdictions in a state are intended simply to prevent measures from moving ahead.

“To have a minority of counties or people have veto power over an initiative is fundamentally wrong,” she said. “There is a reason why conservatives are pushing that forward. It is simply to make the ballot initiative process harder.”

She said already it costs millions of dollars to gather signatures and get an item on the Arizona ballot, and requiring signature gatherers in multiple places simply raises that bar.

Proposition 129 limits topics in ballot measures

Proposition 129, approved in 2022, will require future voter initiatives to cover only one subject and require a description of that subject in the title. Any portion of such an initiative not addressed in the title is void, even if approved by voters.

Supporters contend the measure will simply prevent “log rolling” in future initiatives, where unrelated issues are combined to pass unpopular measures along with more widely supported changes, "forcing voters to take the bad with the good,” as Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, said in 2021 when he introduced the measure at the Legislature.

Supporters included the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Center for Arizona Policy and other business interests who contend the measure will ensure voters don't inadvertently approve something that is not described in a measure's title.

Opponents included representatives from the League of Women Voters, One Arizona, Arizona Education Association, Living United for Change in Arizona and others who said it limits the power of voters to enact their own laws.

Kavanagh said the measure was required because of a court case involving the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and employment insurance.

Proposition 206 passed in 2016 and raised the state minimum hourly wage from $8.05 to $10, with additional increases reaching $12 an hour by 2020. It also requires employers to provide at least three days of paid sick leave to workers.

The Chamber of Commerce and Industry, which had opposed the measure, sued and accused the measure of violating the single-subject rule, which is what lawmakers must follow when introducing legislation. The Arizona Supreme Court rejected that argument.

Kavanagh said the change was required to ensure ballot measures do have to follow the single-subject rule.

“Single subject is something that we have to deal with in a lot of states,” Ledford said. “It is not necessarily a barrier to entry in Arizona. It just changes the calculus for groups looking to use the initiative process.”

It’s unclear how the rule might affect future measures in the state, she said. It might not change the content of proposed measures at all, but the concern from her group is that it gives opponents of any given measure a new rule to cite when they sue to stop a measure.

“It gives opponents another avenue of attack,” she said, adding that it creates more uncertainty and thus limits the motivation of anyone looking to make changes to state law through the ballot.

For example, the 2016 ballot measure that raised the minimum wage also included provisions for expanding sick leave for workers. The 2020 ballot measure that legalized marijuana use for adults included provisions to erase criminal records for people with low-level marijuana charges and also created a new licensing system for marijuana shops run by people harmed by the war on drugs.

Supermajority now needed to raise taxes

Voters in 2022 also approved Proposition 132, which requires 60% approval of voters for new taxes.

Already, lawmakers must have a two-thirds vote to approve new taxes when they vote on such matters in the Legislature.

But opponents said it could result in minority rule, in which 41% of voters could block legislation dealing with the array of issues that rely on tax dollars.

Supporters included then-Gov. Ducey, representatives from the Goldwater Institute, Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Arizona Tax Research Association, Arizona Free Enterprise Club and others, who said that broad agreement should be required to raise taxes.

Opponents included representatives from the Arizona Center for Economic Progress, League of Women Voters, Arizona Education Association, Children's Action Alliance, Living United for Change in Arizona, One Arizona and others.

Dunn, who introduced the measure at the Legislature, said the idea to require 60% of voters to approve any tax increase is to ensure any such measure transcends party lines.

During a Feb. 9, 2022, committee hearing, Dunn said it was a responsible measure.

He said the marijuana bill in 2020 surpassed the 60% threshold.

It’s important when there’s something that can’t be changed by the Legislature because of the Voter Protection Act, it should have wide support, he said.

“It seems like if it’s something the electorate and voters want, it passes,” he said.

Reach reporter Ryan Randazzo at ryan.randazzo@arizonarepublic.com or 602-444-4331. Follow him on X, formerly Twitter: @UtilityReporter.

This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Changes in Arizona law mean there may be fewer items on ballot in 2024