Only the Utah Legislature can amend Utah's Constitution and place the issue on the ballot. How an amendment is worded on the ballot and the information given to voters can greatly impact whether it's approved or rejected. That's probably why the GOP-controlled Legislature changed the rules for that process earlier this year.
In the past, legislative lawyers were responsible for writing the ballot summary for a constitutional amendment. They were also tasked with providing voters with an "impartial analysis" of the amendment, including any fiscal impact. That analysis was included in Utah's Voter Information Pamphlet, published by the lieutenant governor's office before the election.
SB37, which lawmakers approved during the 2024 session, ripped those tasks away from the non-partisan Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel, putting them in the hands of partisan elected officials - specifically the Senate president and speaker of the House.
One reason Amendment D, which aimed to give the Legislature near-total authority to alter or veto any ballot initiative approved by voters, was voided from the ballot was for its ballot summary. Courts held the ballot language, authored by Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton, and House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, was misleading and did not accurately describe the impact the amendment would have if approved by voters.
Amendment A, which would drastically alter how Utah public schools are funded, is also facing a court challenge over its ballot summary, which critics contend is misleading.
In election years, the state publishes a voter information pamphlet explaining any ballot initiative, referendum or constitutional amendment to voters. Legislative attorneys were responsible for providing an "impartial analysis" of those ballot measures, including any potential fiscal impact.
Under SB37, legislative lawyers are still responsible for analyzing a ballot initiative or referendum. However, the analysis of a constitutional amendment is now the responsibility of the leaders of the Utah House and Senate. The bill removes the requirement that the assessment of a constitutional amendment be "impartial."
In 2018, voters approved Constitutional Amendment C, which gave the Legislature the authority to call itself into a special session under certain circumstances, including an "emergency in the affairs of the state." Previously, only the governor could call a special session. That emergency provision is the justification lawmakers used to conduct the special session in August, during which they placed Amendment D on the ballot.
Four years later, lawmakers sought to increase how much money they could spend in a special session initiated by the Legislature through Amendment A. The impartial analysis contained in the 2022 voter information pamphlet explained that the Legislature could potentially spend more than a billion instead of being limited to appropriating a few hundred million dollars.
Amendment A got crushed as voters rejected the measure by nearly 30 points.
There's good reason for lawmakers to want to control how this year's Amendment A is presented to voters because it deals with public education funding.
Utah's Constitution requires that income tax revenues can only fund public and higher education and some social services. If voters approve Amendment A, lawmakers could shift income tax revenue toward other parts of the budget. The proposed change does not guarantee future funding levels for public education but only requires lawmakers to use a portion of future revenue growth to pay for increased student enrollment and inflation.