Ballot measures key part of GOP agenda

Republican majorities eye more constitutional amendments to join gay marriage ban

The passage of the constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage was the defining moment of the final days of Minnesota’s 2011 legislative session, and the first modern Republican-controlled Legislature is gearing up to bypass DFL Gov. Mark Dayton’s signature again next year and add a few more to the 2012 ballot.

After a gubernatorial veto last session, a move to put voter photo identification on the ballot is already afoot. And during internal caucus negotiations on the special session budget deal, a group of hard-line House Republicans exacted a promise from leadership to pass an amendment to require a legislative “super-majority” to raise taxes in exchange for their budget votes. In addition, GOP Capitol hands say there are eager talks about throwing a right-to-work amendment into the mix.

“What you’ve got is conservative-minded thought, and there hasn’t been a conservative Legislature in 40 years,” GOP operative Gregg Peppin said. “This is a normal process of that electoral change.”

“I trust that the people of Minnesota can make a good determination of what should be in the Constitution,” said attorney and Republican House freshman Doug Wardlow, who was part of the push to bring the tax super-majority bill as a constitutional amendment. “These are important issues that the people of Minnesota should get to weigh in on.”

Most say having two to three amendments on the ballot is not overcrowding. In fact, that has historically been the case in Minnesota since statehood. But the political dynamic created by a slew of conservative amendments on the ballot in 2012 could cut both ways, political science experts and party operatives say.

Amendments common since statehood

A constitutional amendment started it all.

In 1858, early settlers got the chance to vote on a ballot measure to establish Minnesota’s first state government. It passed with 25,023 yes votes and 6,733 votes against. Early on, the state Constitution required that a proposed amendment be approved by a simple majority of both legislative chambers and then ratified by a simple majority of the votes cast on the ballot question in the next general election.

But in 1898 the standard was elevated to require “a majority of all the electors voting at the election,” not just those voting on the ballot initiative. That meant anyone who opted not to vote on a given amendment automatically became a “no” vote.

Since 1858 there have been 211 proposed amendments, 119 of which were ultimately adopted. Many years saw at least two or three amendments on the ballot. In 1914, a record 11 initiatives were placed on the ballot; all but one succeeded. In recent years ballot initiatives have been comparatively scarce. In 2006 the motor vehicle sales tax reached the ballot and passed; in 2008 the Legacy sales tax amendment passed muster; in 2010, there were no constitutional amendments on the ballot. The last time there were at least three amendments on the ballot was 1998, including one to abolish the position of state treasurer. All were approved.

Historically, there is no clear correlation between how many amendments are on the ballot and how many pass. In 1980 five amendments were on the ballot and all but one failed.

“It’s pretty clear that voters generally don’t have a very good understanding of the difference between putting something in their Constitution on one hand and enacting an ordinary law on the other hand,” Robert Williams, a professor at the Rutgers Law School in Camden, N.J., said. “They look at the policy being proposed, they say, ‘Oh gee, I’m either for or against that on its merits,’ and they don’t have a clear understanding that by putting this stuff in the Constitution, you raise it above ordinary statutory law so that the elected Legislature cannot come in and change it later on.”

Republicans proposed more than 10 constitutional amendments last session, including the gay marriage ban, voter photo ID, right to work, political term limits, judicial retention elections, and a repeal of the Legacy amendment. The whole gamut is on the table next session, but only a handful – photo identification, a supermajority tax vote requirement and right to work – are generating the kind of buzz that suggests they could join the gay marriage amendment on the ballot next fall. That number is not out of the realm of normalcy, Hamline University political science professor David Schultz says.

One legislative area that may be off the amendment table: anti-abortion issues. Anti-abortion powerhouse Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (MCCL) does not plan to push anti-abortion or cloning initiatives via constitutional amendments next session, group head Scott Fischbach said. That’s despite the fact that the issues fell to the wayside this year when the governor and GOP leadership agreed to drop social issues from their budget bills in order to end the government shutdown.

“It’s just not a priority; it’s not the route for us to take,” said Fischbach, who is married to Senate President Michelle Fischbach. “It’s been discussed a lot, but we don’t believe that it’s where we should go.”

A ‘high-risk, high-reward’ strategy

DFL Party Chair Ken Martin has some experience with constitutional amendments: He ran the campaign for the 2008 Legacy amendment, which garnered 56 percent of the vote — more than any statewide candidate received that year.

He says there are dangers to Republicans in stacking the ballot with amendments. Not only could they confuse their base and complicate the ballot, Martin said, but the more they add on, the more relevant the question of ballot placement becomes. Some initiatives could wind up on the back on the ballot, he said, a place some voters never look.

The move to load the ballot also has Martin worried. “If you have the GLBT [activists] fighting the marriage amendment, and the labor unions fighting right-to-work, and pro-choice groups fighting reproductive right amendments, then who do you have left to fight in the elections?” Martin said. “It’s an interesting strategy. It’s a high-risk, high-reward strategy, because these issues could just rev up our base. It does make things complicated next year. We are all focused on winning back the majorities and when you throw those into the mix, it makes it tough to figure out where you will find the resources to do all that.”

As far as political strategy for the GOP is concerned, the more the merrier, says Alan Tarr, the director of the Center for State Constitutional Studies at Rutgers University in Camden. The reason: Each amendment appeals to a different part of the conservative base. Fiscal conservatives will like the tax super-majority measure, social conservatives will come out for the gay marriage amendment, and photo ID at the polls covers everyone else. “If you’re already in the ballot booth and you’re voting, there’s no reason why you wouldn’t just vote yes on the other items,” he said.

However, there is a chance for the gay marriage amendment — the first to pass and highest profile ballot initiative —to backfire on Republicans. “It could mobilize people under 30 and progressives and liberals who would otherwise not want to come out because they are not excited about Obama,” Schultz said.  “They could come out for gay marriage.”

Peppin agrees. “Originally,” he said, “there was some discussion at the beginning of the year to the effect that if the marriage amendment was on the ballot, it would help drive turnout on the conservative side…. [But] if you look at this thing now, what you’re seeing is that left-wing progressives are starting to get turned off by Obama. So maybe it’s Obama who needs that marriage amendment to get his people to the polls, because they are so disillusioned with him. I wouldn’t have thought that six months ago.”

3 Responses to “Ballot measures key part of GOP agenda”

1. Tom Smith Says:
   July 29th, 2011 at 10:13 pm

   I sincerely doubt the GOP will be able to help themselves by stopping at just two or three ballot questions. And while their base will love it, the amendments will also (and is already) energizing progressives and liberals.

   The more, the merrier, perhaps for the base. But there won’t be an enthusiasm gap this time around, and more ballot questions will turn off independent voters–which may doom their amendments, and cost them their narrow majorities in the legislature.

2. Bob Johnson Says:
   August 1st, 2011 at 9:29 am

   Shorter MN GOP: California functions well via legislation-by-referendum, let’s try that here!

3. R S Says:
   August 1st, 2011 at 9:39 am

   I am a fiscal conservative but socially liberal, and I likely represent the silent, middle majority. If the GOP and other “conservative” and “less government” think they are going to go for a power grab and try and take rights away from citizens, then I will tell you that myself and others like me will be rallied to defeat them. The GOP is really making a big mistake here. If it stuck to financial matters, they would find a lot more support. But this constant land grab for social **** is going to backfire.

   Here’s a tip: If you are against Gay Marriage, then DON’T MARRY A GAY PERSON. Otherwise, follow your supposed conservative philosophy: stay the hell out of people’s personal lives.

   More and more of my friends: young, intelligent, and savvy are stirring. We are not going to let the GOP get away with this. I dare you to try. Wake us up. It will only motivate us.