Utah lawmakers expected to play 'hardball' with citizen initiatives after recent losses in court.
Small Lake City
By Katharine Biele @kathybiele
It may seem like the Utah Legislature is power hungry. Their recent sleight of hand would have asked voters to approve Amendment D, allowing lawmakers to eviscerate any citizen ballot initiative. It didn't happen, but something surely will.
While Utah was the second state to establish an initiative and referendum process, it took 16 years to make it happen. Even then, the Legislature didn't like it and made it almost impossible—voters who supported initiatives had to sign documents in-person before someone "competent to administer oaths," according to Ballotpedia.
That changed after WWII, but it still took until 1960 for voters to approve their first initiative, which created a merit system for hiring deputy sheriffs. Next came a battle with hunting enthusiasts, who passed Proposition 5 in 1998, requiring animal protection initiatives to pass by a two-thirds vote. Sound familiar? Last session, legislators attempted to pass an amendment requiring two-thirds votes on any initiative with tax implications. Citizens balked and it failed—at least for now.
The operative message from the Legislature is that Utah will become "California" if it allows unfettered initiatives. But since 1952, Utahns have passed only seven initiatives; in California, since 1912, it's 137 initiatives.
University of Utah professor Jim Curry thinks much of what's happening is lawmakers tweaking the system's internal process, including a 2018 amendment that allows the Legislature to call itself into special session, a power previously reserved for the governor. "It's adjusting how their legislative counsel reports on things, how it can call itself into session," Curry said. "These are pretty standard legislative powers. There is supposed to be a clear separation of powers."
Curry suggests Utah will see some "constitutional hardball" in the next legislative session. But others warn that could go too far.
"It's been disturbing to see our Legislature become more and more distanced from the actual will of the people they serve, all in the name of aggregating power," said attorney David Reymann, who worked on the independent redistricting initiative.
Earlier this year, lawmakers pulled the plug on their Legislative Research and General Counsel, which had been writing ballot summaries. The task was turned over to the House speaker and Senate president, and the Utah Supreme Court found their summary of Amendment D to be misleading and unconstitutional. They've since voided Amendment A on similar grounds.
To say lawmakers are unhappy is an understatement. They've blamed the ruling on "unelected judges." Make no mistake, the Legislature is coming for the courts—even though judges are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate. "Courts don't overstep their bounds when they tell the Legislature what the constitution means," Reymann said. "They vindicate the people's rights that the Legislature has been trying to take away."
About The Author
Katharine Biele
A City Weekly contributor since 1992, Katharine Biele is the informed voice behind our Hits & Misses column. When not writing, you can catch her working to empower voters and defend democracy alongside the League of Women Voters.
More by Katharine Biele
-
Sean Reyes' calendar, finally public, shows the Utah AG padding his resume.
Hits & Misses
- Nov 20, 2024
-
Utah County Clerk Aaron Davidson plays games with mail-in ballots and sparks an Election Day meltdown
Hits & Misses
- Nov 13, 2024
-
Utah's Phil Lyman throws a Hail Mary to the Supreme Court hoping to keep write-in campaign alive.
Hits & Misses
- Oct 30, 2024
- More »
Latest in News
Readers also liked…
-
Raise a glass for E.L.T Harrison, architect of the Beerhive building on Main
Small Lake City
- Oct 11, 2023
