Voting may be a bit more confusing than expected in Utah this year, as two of the four amendments on the ballot have now been voided.

The Utah Supreme Court nixed Amendment D, which would have allowed state lawmakers the power to change voter initiatives and prohibit "foreign influence in the initiative process." And this week, a Third District Court judge also voided Amendment A, which would have allowed state income taxes to be used for needs other than public education.

A new report from the Utah Foundation examines each of the four amendments. Annalisa Holcombe, the foundation's board chair, said information is power, especially around election time "because we know how important it is to provide clarity around public policy issues that affect us and the state of Utah as voters, and to have an independent, nonpartisan view of these amendments."

Amendments A and D will remain on the ballot, but won't be counted. Instead, voters will weigh in on Amendments B and C. Amendment B would increase the limit on annual distributions from the State School Fund to public schools from 4% to 5%, and Amendment C would require counties to elect a sheriff every four years. Both face little to no opposition.

Utah Foundation President Shawn Teigen described some of the information surrounding the amendments as "misleading" and unclear about the real issues at hand. Teigen said the topics of both Amendments A and D are likely to make a comeback in the future, and encourages people to learn more about these issues now.

"There's a chance to educate some folks here, to give people a little bit of information," he said, "so that when and if these come back that we'll have something to fall back on, in terms of some past education."

The report also explains that enacting amendments and changing the Utah Constitution is a long and complex process. Constitutional amendments have to pass the Utah Legislature by 66% and then be ratified by 50% of the public. By contrast, most Utah laws pass with a simple majority of legislators.

Legislation in Virginia would prohibit any systematic removals of people from voter rolls at least 90 days before an election.

Last August, Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin signed an executive order requiring daily updates to voter rolls, instead of monthly. The Department of Motor Vehicles found more than 6,000 people marked as noncitizens were registered to vote in Virginia.

Voting rights advocates countered people may accidentally check the box saying they are not a citizen or they have gained citizenship between DMV visits.

Sheila Herlihy Hennessee, director of faith organizing at the Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy, said purges so close to elections affect people across the Commonwealth.

"This affects rural areas. This affects new Americans. This affects a lot of people around Virginia, and I want to see our legislators protect those individuals," Herlihy Hennessee outlined. "This has the legs to be a bipartisan issue."

Youngkin has defended his executive order as necessary to protect election security. The Trump administration recently dropped a lawsuit against the daily updates initiated during President Joe Biden's tenure.

The legislation is one of a flurry of other election-related bills passed by the General Assembly. Others would extend deadlines to return mail-in ballots and extend voter registration periods. Herlihy Hennessee noted some people may just not vote if these purges take place too near an election, which makes a "quiet period" essential.

"Having these 'quiet periods' before an election gives folks time to double-check their registration, to prove their citizenship, to reregister if that's needed if they are accidentally taken off the rolls," Herlihy Hennessee explained. "That quiet period also ensures that registrars have accurate lists of eligible voters."

Youngkin has yet to announce whether he will veto the bill or sign it into law.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.


get more stories like this via email

Absentee ballot restrictions and shortening the amount of time it takes to purge inactive voters from the voting rolls are priorities for West Virginia lawmakers this session.

Senate Bill 487, which now heads to the governor's desk, removes ineligible voters from the active roles after two years of inactivity, rather than four.

Rusty Williams, advocacy director for the ACLU of West Virginia, said the volume of legislation this year aimed at changing the way elections are conducted in the state is alarming.

"Especially when we have folks in southern West Virginia still trying to clean up from some historic and devastating flooding, you would think that would be the priority," Williams contended.

The West Virginia House also passed House Bill 2117, which would shorten the ballot return period by requiring ballots be received by 7:30 p.m. on Election Day, rather than being postmarked on or before Election Day.

Supporters of the bills argue they would reduce voter fraud and election discrepancies. This week, Gov. Patrick Morrisey also signed a bill banning ranked choice voting.

Williams explained House Bill 2117 places tighter restrictions on absentee ballots, noting people would no longer be able to hand out ballot applications in places such as nursing homes or libraries.

"Giving it to folks unsolicited could put you in a position where you could be found guilty of a misdemeanor, and fined $500 and put in jail for six months," Williams outlined. "Again, we're talking about a public document here."

Williams believes state lawmakers should focus on reinstating voting rights to people coming out of prison, on probation or supervised release.

"Unfortunately, that has been an incredibly uphill battle," he acknowledged. "We're continuing to fight on a daily basis."

According to the Sentencing Project, more than 15,000 Mountain State residents are barred from voting because of a felony conviction.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Many Texans feel strongly, one way or another, about the proposed school voucher bill before state lawmakers. Gov. Greg Abbott has proposed a plan to provide $10,000 vouchers to parents to help cover the cost of private schools.

Christina Sanders, founder of the nonprofit PoliChic Engagement Fund, said taxpayers should pay close attention to the details of the policy.

"Taking that money away from schools and forcing our districts to shut down schools and forcing teachers to not be able to have living wages. So just the school conversation in general is something that people should really pay attention to," she explained.

Hundreds of Texas school teachers spent their spring break testifying before lawmakers against the bill. They say vouchers will take needed funds away from public schools. The governor says vouchers give parents the freedom to make the best education choices for their children and will benefit students from low-income households.

Sanders says whether it's school choice or another issue before the legislature, the public should remember that lawmakers work for them, and you have the right to voice your opinion.

"Showing up and holding people accountable that work for you, which is your representative, and ensuring that they are putting resources where you would like them to go is the whole point of a representative republic," Sanders said.

GOP lawmakers tried unsuccessfully to pass school vouchers in the last legislative session.

Sanders said the session is available online and people can also contact representatives by email, phone, or on social media.

"Our organization can help prepare any individual who wants to testify and just tell their story and publicly talk about and share with the committee that's making the decision about what their ideas are and what their experience has been and what they'd like to see," Sanders concluded.