60% threshold for changing North Dakota’s constitution debated as a protection or a barrier

North Dakota voters will decide this fall whether to require at least 60% approval of future amendments to the state constitution, a move supporters say would protect the foundational document, but opponents say would make it harder for citizens to enact changes.

Measure 1 opponent Dustin Gawrylow, director of the North Dakota Watchdog Network, debated proponent James Kerian, a Grafton businessman chosen by StrongND, a group backing the measure, on the Plain Talk Podcast hosted by Rob Port and Chad Oban. North Dakota’s Republican-led Legislature put Measure 1 on the ballot.

North Dakota’s constitution provides a stable, firm foundation to the state government, and Measure 1 ensures broad agreement on changes to the document, Kerian said.

“This is where our fundamental, core principles go: limiting the government, recognizing the rights that we have and wielding, of course, tremendous power right there at the foundation of our state government, and voters, of course, should retain the ultimate say, as they will with Measure 1,” Kerian said.

Voters must approve all changes to North Dakota’s constitution, whether from the Legislature or an initiated measure.

Out-of-state organizations with lots of money are targeting North Dakota’s constitution, he said, citing the Fairness Project, a D.C.-based group that supports ballot measures in other states on topics such as reproductive rights and redistricting. The Fairness Project has spent more than $1.6 million to oppose Measure 1, according to online campaign finance filings. Kerian said the group pushes a “left-wing agenda” on red states through ballot measures.

Measure 1’s higher bar would make it harder to fix or reverse anything in the constitution, and effectively hand control to a minority of 40% plus one vote, Gawrylow said.

Out-of-state money is a legitimate issue, and something needs to be done about it, Gawrylow said. He brought up StrongND, which is not required to disclose its donors. The group is aligned with Republican Gov. Kelly Armstrong and has spent nearly $1 million to back Measure 1. Fights about who is spending money on either side distracts from the merits of the measure, he said.

The Legislature has always tried to chip away at the initiative process, Gawrylow said. He pointed out two camps: people who genuinely believe the constitution is under attack, and those who are vindictive and simply don’t trust voters, he said.

Oban, one of the moderators, wondered whether the 60% threshold is meant to thwart an abortion rights amendment.

North Dakota Right to Life recently cited other states that passed abortion rights measures with less than 60% of the vote, saying, “If North Dakota faces an abortion amendment in the future, the difference between 50% and 60% could determine whether abortion is written into our state Constitution.”

Kerian said, “Abortion is certainly one of the issues where the Fairness Project pushes a very left-wing agenda.” Measure 1 is not about past amendments, but rather a “future threat” coming quickly to North Dakota, he said.

“This just provides some protection so that you do not have an extreme agenda on any subject passed on very narrow margins by an extremely well funded, left-wing organization,” he said.

Behind the measure are state lawmakers, who don’t like “the citizens telling them what to do,” Gawrylow said. 

Sponsor, opponent debate need for North Dakota ballot measure to change constitution

For years, North Dakota lawmakers have bristled about out-of-state groups pouring money into constitutional initiatives on topics such as crime victim rights, state government ethics and term limits – all measures voters approved. The Legislature has submitted measures to voters in past years to try to make it harder to change the constitution, with little success until last June, when voters approved a single-subject rule for constitutional amendments.

The initiative process benefits North Dakota’s dominant Republicans from a partisan standpoint, Gawrylow argued. Without the “pressure relief valve” of the initiative process to check the Republican-run Legislature, citizens might have a better reason to elect Democrats, he said.

Some people might have an axe to grind with Republican lawmakers over past issues, but “the issue before us is Measure 1” and whether wider agreement is necessary to change the constitution, Kerian said.

The vast majority of constitutional amendments voters have approved over the last 20 years have had 60% support or greater, he said. Some of those measures were ones creating the Legacy Fund, crime victim rights, legislative and gubernatorial term limits and a congressional age limit. Some measures mustered support well over 80%.

“This is not some impossible-to-reach threshold that good ideas will not be able to clear,” Kerian said.

The U.S. Constitution has high thresholds for amendments, such as support of at least three-quarters of all 50 states. Measure 1 is a “tried and true method of protecting a constitution” from being changed too easily, Kerian said.

Gawrylow said the question is whether North Dakota should change a century-old process to allow a minority of voters to have power over the majority.

“Why would we hold ourselves to a higher bar just because somebody else is taking advantage of the system?” he said. 

Measure 1, which would set the 60% threshold for future constitutional amendments, needs a simple majority to pass. The measure doesn’t apply to ballot initiatives affecting state law.

Reach North Dakota Monitor reporter Jack Dura at [email protected].