Opponents say the language of Utah’s Constitutional Amendment D is ‘deceptive’

SALT LAKE CITY — A controversial proposal to change Utah’s Constitution over initiatives has just been made public, causing some critics to accuse the legislature of being deceptive in its writing.

The proposed amendment reads:

Should the Utah Constitution be changed to strengthen the initiative process by:

– Prohibiting foreign influence on ballot initiatives and referendums.

– Clarifying the voters and legislative bodies’ ability to amend laws.

If approved, state law would also be changed to:

– Allow Utah citizens 50% more time to gather signatures for a statewide referendum.

– Establish requirements for the legislature to follow the intent of a ballot initiative.

( )FOR ( )AGAINST

Critics said the language is written like an advertisement, not a neutral question.

“I think the language is deceptive because I think the main effect of the amendment is to seriously weaken the initiative process,” said Rep. Ray Ward, R-Bountiful, who voted against putting the measure on the ballot in the Aug. 21 special session.

“The Ballot language issued by legislative leadership is hopelessly deceptive,” said Better Boundaries Board member Ryan Bell.

In a written statement from Bell, he stated:

It is not true that this amendment will strengthen the initiative process; it will weaken that process. 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. Better Boundaries and its many allies will ensure that the people of Utah see through these tactics.

Utah’s proposed Constitutional Amendment on initiatives: Here’s the question to ponder

However, the two presiding members of Utah’s legislature who wrote the measure, Senate President Stuart Adams and House Speaker Mike Schultz, are pushing back.

In a joint statement, the pair criticized their critics, saying:

Using clear and straightforward language is common practice and crucial for ensuring voters fully understand the measures they are deciding on. We recognize there will always be criticism, but our objective remains consistent – to provide a straightforward and concise description to allow voters to easily understand the core of the proposed changes. 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.

UPDATE: Utah's Senate President @JStuartAdams and House Speaker @mschultz_12 are defending the language of this proposed Constitutional change saying it is "straightforward and concise." In a joint statement to me, they say "those who are trying to label these efforts as… https://t.co/1spuLM9Nw0 pic.twitter.com/vLIOjgibR0

— Lindsay Aerts (@LindsayOnAir) September 4, 2024

A spokesperson for groups in favor of the change also pushed back on claims that the language is deceptive, saying, “The amendment prohibits foreign influence and clarifies the legislature’s role in the initiative process. 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,” said Marty Carpenter of the ‘Yes on Amendment D’ campaign.

Ultimately, a vote in favor of the amendment means that the voter supports the legislature’s ability to repeal laws created by citizens after they pass, and they want to block foreign money from swaying votes and make it easier to repeal laws.

A vote against it means that the voter wants Utah’s Constitution to stay as it’s written and that the right to alter and reform government belongs to the people. The legislature should only change citizen initiatives if that change supports the law the citizens are trying to pass.