North Dakota Ballot Measures Spark Debate Over Lawmaker "Power Grab"

Critics say proposed changes to the initiated measure process would undermine public participation in state politics.

Published on Feb. 4, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A discussion on three North Dakota ballot measures advanced by state lawmakers drew criticism from attendees on Monday, with some opposed to changing the initiated measure process. The measures would require future constitutional ballot measures to be a single subject, increase the voter approval threshold to 60% for constitutional changes, and allow lawmakers to alter term limits. Critics argue these changes would consolidate power with the legislature and diminish the public's role in state decision-making.

Why it matters

The debate over these ballot measures highlights an ongoing tension in North Dakota politics between the legislature's desire for more control and the public's ability to directly shape the state's constitution and laws through the initiated measure process. Supporters say the changes are needed to protect the state's constitution, while critics view them as a "power grab" that undermines direct democracy.

The details

The three measures in question are: Measure 1, which would require future constitutional ballot measures to be a single subject; Measure 2, which would increase the voter approval threshold for constitutional changes to 60%; and a November measure that would allow lawmakers to change the state's term limits law. Opponents argue these changes give the legislature more power at the expense of the public's ability to directly influence the political process through initiatives.

  • Measure 1 will be on the June 9 primary ballot.
  • Measure 2 will be on the November 3 general election ballot.
  • The November measure on term limits is being challenged in court, with the North Dakota Supreme Court expected to hear the case this spring.

The players

North Dakota Watchdog Network

A group that advocates for government transparency and accountability in North Dakota.

Dakota Resource Council

A grassroots organization that works on environmental and agricultural issues in North Dakota.

Dustin Gawrylow

Managing director of the North Dakota Watchdog Network.

Ellen Chaffee

Member of the BadAss Grandmas for Democracy, a group that spearheaded an initiated measure in 2018 to establish the state's Ethics Commission.

Taylor Johnson

A Bismarck resident who expressed frustration with the legislature's "power grabs" regarding the initiated measure process.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“There's a constant need for education because every time the Legislature meets, there seems to be these in-roads trying to remove the public from their decision-making process.”

— Brad Carroll, Bismarck resident (North Dakota Monitor)

“The folks that support this say that the North Dakota Constitution is too easy to change and the state constitution should be as static as the national Constitution, which rarely ever gets changed.”

— Dustin Gawrylow, Managing director, North Dakota Watchdog Network (North Dakota Monitor)

“It can cut through some of the noise of partisan politics, and I think it really helps us come together as a community and decide things for ourselves. I'm frustrated with the repeated, I guess, power grabs from the Legislature.”

— Taylor Johnson, Bismarck resident (North Dakota Monitor)

“You get seduced by the power and you come to own it as your own, unless you are really careful. That's what's happened to them (state lawmakers). They think they're that smart. They think they're that right...and they think you are wrong.”

— Ellen Chaffee, Member, BadAss Grandmas for Democracy (North Dakota Monitor)

What’s next

The North Dakota Supreme Court is expected to hear the case challenging the November measure on term limits this spring.

The takeaway

The debate over these ballot measures highlights an ongoing tug-of-war in North Dakota politics between the legislature's desire for more control and the public's ability to directly shape the state's constitution and laws through the initiated measure process. The outcome of these measures could have significant implications for the balance of power between the state government and its citizens.