Voters in several states are being asked in 2026 to change how state constitutional amendments are approved, including proposals to raise the statewide vote threshold to 60% or to add new geographic approval requirements. Supporters say the changes would curb what they view as an overuse of constitutional amendments, while voting-rights and ballot-measure advocates warn the proposals could make citizen-led constitutional changes significantly harder to enact.
Voters in North Dakota and South Dakota are set to weigh proposals that would require 60% approval statewide for constitutional amendments.
In North Dakota, the Secretary of State lists a 2026 general-election measure that would raise the threshold for approving a state constitutional amendment from a simple majority to 60%. (sos.nd.gov) In South Dakota, the Secretary of State lists a legislatively referred constitutional amendment slated for the Nov. 3, 2026 general election that would require a constitutional amendment to receive an affirmative vote of 60% of the votes cast to take effect. (sdsos.gov)
In Utah, a proposal discussed in NPR’s report would apply a higher approval bar only to certain tax-related ballot measures, rather than to all constitutional amendments. (kunc.org) (The NPR report describes the Utah proposal as limited to tax-related items, but the underlying ballot language and election listing for Utah were not provided among the official Utah election sources reviewed here.)
In Missouri, voters will consider a measure commonly referred to as Amendment 4 during the state’s Aug. 4, 2026 primary election, NPR reports. (kunc.org) The measure would add a geographic requirement for voter approval of constitutional amendments: the text of a Missouri joint resolution included in NPR’s sourcing would require passage by “a majority of the votes cast thereon statewide” and a majority in more than half of Missouri’s congressional districts, rather than in every district. (senate.mo.gov)
Supporters of the changes argue that state constitutions are being amended too often or with subjects that would be better handled through ordinary law.
North Dakota state Rep. Robin Weisz told NPR that the state constitution is being “cluttered up” with issues he believes should be statutory. (kunc.org) In South Dakota, Republican state Rep. John Hughes said during a legislative hearing, according to NPR, that voters often do not understand the difference between constitutional amendments and statutory ballot measures, arguing that statutes can be adjusted more easily while constitutions are comparatively static. (kunc.org)
Voting-rights and ballot-measure advocates, meanwhile, say higher thresholds and district-based requirements can give a minority of voters the power to block changes supported by a statewide majority.
Quentin Savwoir, identified by NPR as the director of programs and strategy at the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, called the push to raise thresholds the “antithesis of democracy,” arguing that American democracy is grounded in majority rule. (kunc.org) NPR also reported that Kelly Hall of the Fairness Project criticized the efforts as “patronizing,” saying they reflect distrust of voters. (kunc.org)
