Critics say text of proposed Utah constitutional amendment is 'misleading'

SALT LAKE CITY — Critics of a proposed constitutional amendment on citizen-led ballot initiatives in Utah are pushing back against the text of the question that will appear on ballots across the state this fall, calling it "misleading" and "hopelessly slanted."

The text of proposed constitutional "Amendment D" — which was written by Utah House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, and Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton — was made public on the state election website this week, along with the text of three other proposed constitutional changes voters will weigh in on in November.

In the wake of a July Supreme Court ruling that found the Legislature overreached in altering a 2018 ballot initiative to create an independent redistricting commission, lawmakers last month voted to approve the proposed amendment aiming to head off the impact of the ruling which found "the people's exercise of their right to reform the government through an initiative is constitutionally protected from government infringement, including legislative amendment or repeal that impairs the intended reform."

After that measure passed on mostly partisan lines — with a handful of Republicans voting against it — the top legislative leaders crafted the precise language of the question on the ballot, which reads:

Utahns will have the chance to vote "for" or "against" the proposal, which needs at least 50% support to successfully change the state Constitution.

A joint statement from Schultz and Adams said their objective was to "provide a straightforward and concise description to allow voters to easily understand the core of the proposed changes," but opponents of the effort to change the Constitution called the language misleading. Ryan Bell, a board member of Better Boundaries, said the proposed amendment would "weaken" the initiative process, which is the opposite of the wording of the ballot question.

"Using clear and straightforward language is common practice and crucial for ensuring voters fully understand the measures they are deciding on," Schultz and Adams' statement said. "Additionally, voters always have access to comprehensive analysis and arguments both for and against the amendments. 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."

Better Boundaries led the initial push to establish an independent redistricting commission in 2018 and has been rallying support against the proposed amendment.

"The ballot language issued by legislative leadership is hopelessly slanted. It is not true that this amendment will strengthen the initiative process; it will weaken that process," Bell stated. "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.

"It is saddening to see legislative leadership compound their refusal to engage with the people on this issue with ballot language that is likely to mislead the people," he continued.

Utah Supreme Court: Legislature overstepped in changing voter-led redistricting initiative

Utah's House speaker says lawmakers are already considering undoing Thursday's ruling that says lawmakers overstepped the people's authority by changing a voter initiative.

Some members of the Legislature expressed concern about the language, including Rep. Marsha Judkins, a Provo Republican who voted against the resolution to put the proposed amendment on the ballot.

"You have got to be kidding," she said in a post on the social platform X. "What misleading language!"

In a message to constituents posted on her website last month, Judkins said she has heard lots of "fearmongering and catastrophizing" about the Supreme Court ruling, but said limiting lawmakers' ability to overturn initiatives passed by voters is "a healthy check on our power."

"I think the language is deceptive because I think the main effect of the amendment is to seriously weaken the initiative process," Rep. Ray Ward, R-Bountiful, another Republican who opposed putting the measure on the ballot, told KSL.

Sen. Nate Blouin, a Democrat from Salt Lake City, said the "language is even more disingenuous and misleading than I expected it would be. If you must lie to pass your proposal, you don't belong in office."

Still, others in the Legislature and groups supportive of changing the Constitution defended the text and the purpose of the ballot question.

"The amendment prohibits foreign influence and clarifies the Legislature's role in the initiative process," said Marty Carpenter, who represents groups in favor of the proposal. "The critics' true concern seems to be that the language is so easy to understand that voters will be hard-pressed to find reasons to oppose it."

"I wonder if those that complain about the language on the ballot know they are making the Legislature's case?" asked Sen. Dan. McCay, R-Riverton, on X. "Initiatives mostly pass/fail because very busy voters only read what is on the ballot and DO NOT READ the actual language."

SJR401, the resolution proposing the amendment, would amend Article VI, Section 1 of the Utah Constitution to include text that reads: "Notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, the people's exercise of their Legislative power as provided in Subsection (2) does not limit or preclude the exercise of Legislative power, including through amending, enacting, or repealing a law, by the Legislature, or by a law making body of a county, city, or town, on behalf of the people whom they are elected to represent."

The same amended section would also state that "foreign individuals, entities, or governments may not, directly or indirectly, influence, support, or oppose an initiative or a referendum."

Three other proposed constitutional changes will appear on the Nov. 5 general election ballot across the state, as follows:

Related topics