Amending the Iowa Constitution is a significant and intricate process requiring agreement from lawmakers in two consecutive general assemblies. This November, alongside the General Election, Iowans will have the opportunity to vote on two proposed amendments concerning the Voting Age and Citizenship, and Gubernatorial Succession. The current proposal regarding the voting age seeks to modify Section 1 of Article II of the Iowa Constitution, specifically changing the designation of eligible voters from “Every” citizen to “Only” a citizen. This seemingly small wording change raises potential concerns about interpretation and the implications for dual citizens. The amendment specifies that only U.S. citizens aged eighteen and older, with specific residency requirements, can vote, while also allowing 17-year-olds who will turn 18 by the next general election to participate in primary elections. This change has garnered attention, especially considering broader national discussions on voting rights for various categories of citizens and non-citizens.
The alteration in wording from “Every” to “Only” raises eyebrows among critics who question its intent. While the current law permits all citizens to vote, the new language could be interpreted to restrict voting rights for individuals with dual citizenship, a consideration that aligns with recent trends among GOP-dominated state legislatures. Notably, Iowa is one of eight states considering amendments aimed at prohibiting non-citizen voting, following a rising sentiment fueled by unverified claims of widespread voter fraud among noncitizen populations. However, comprehensive studies and audits reveal that voter fraud by noncitizens is exceedingly rare in the U.S., leading many experts to challenge the validity of such claims. The implications of enforcing more stringent voting requirements could result in disenfranchisement for certain citizens, particularly as states evaluate the necessity of citizenship inquiries in federal census data, further complicating public perception surrounding voting eligibility.
The second proposed amendment pertains to gubernatorial succession, laying out the protocol for filling a governor’s vacancy due to death, resignation, or removal from office. The amendment stipulates that the lieutenant governor would take over the governor’s role, thereby leaving a vacant position for the lieutenant governor that must subsequently be filled. In cases where the lieutenant governor is unable to serve, the president pro tempore of the senate would assume gubernatorial duties. This measure aims to provide a clear line of succession to prevent uncertainty in governance. Nevertheless, concerns arise when contemplating a scenario where both the governor and lieutenant governor vacate their positions, resulting in the senate’s president pro tempore—an individual not selected by public vote—becoming the acting governor. Critics argue that this could undermine voter representation if the succeeding governor does not reflect the electorate’s choice, revealing potential flaws in accountability during significant leadership transitions.
Amid these proposed amendments, some Iowa residents express frustration over the absence of a confirmed lieutenant governor. Since 2000, the Iowa ballot has seen five proposed amendments, with only two successfully passed. Such historical context reinforces the challenge of garnering voter support for constitutional modifications, especially in an environment characterized by contentious political discourse. The pending amendments embody not only legal changes but also reflect the broader societal debates surrounding voter qualifications and the structures governing state leadership. The deliberation regarding the selection of officials and serving roles in Iowa’s government raises questions about the effectiveness of electoral processes and representation in governance.
The responsibility of voters in this legislative context cannot be overstated. Civic engagement remains crucial as Iowans prepare to weigh these two amendments on their ballots. Understanding the complexities and potential long-term effects of these measures is essential for making informed decisions that align with their values and the state’s governance. Voting serves as an expression of citizens’ voices, particularly as discussions around voter rights, representation, and succession illustrate the significant interplay between state constitutions and the lives of constituents. The outcome of the election may yield implications beyond Iowa, contributing to national conversations surrounding voting privileges and governance frameworks.
As the election approaches, individuals are encouraged to consider the broader implications of these amendments, including the historical context of voting rights, the ongoing debates about citizenship, and the importance of maintaining a representative democracy. Engaging with these issues ensures that the electorate can navigate the complexities of legislative proposals with a well-informed perspective. Linda Schreiber, a longtime Iowa resident and former journalist, emphasizes the importance of active participation in shaping the constitutional foundation of Iowa, urging Iowans to study and understand the issues at stake to make responsible electoral choices in the forthcoming elections. The decisions made in November will reflect the values and priorities of Iowa’s electorate, impacting not only the state’s laws but also the principles guiding its governance.