Eleanor Finch
The Illinois Constitution has been the subject of several proposed amendments in recent years, with citizens seeking to make changes to issues such as term limits, income tax, and legislative district maps. In 2014, over 590,000 voters petitioned for an amendment to limit state lawmakers to eight years in office. More recently, in 2024, voters considered an advisory question on whether to amend the constitution to impose an additional 3% tax on incomes exceeding $1 million to fund property tax relief. While this measure was approved, it was non-binding and served only to gauge public opinion. These developments highlight the ongoing debate and efforts to amend the Illinois Constitution to address various issues and give citizens more power over how the state is governed.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Type of amendment | Structural and procedural subjects |
| Petition requirements | Signed by petitioning electors within 24 months of the general election; filed with the Secretary of State at least six months before the election |
| Validity of petition | Determined by law |
| Effect of amendment | Requires approval by three-fifths of voters or a majority of those voting in the election |
| Legislative approval | Requires an affirmative vote of three-fifths of members elected to each house of the General Assembly |
| Timing of election | Amendment submitted to electors at the next general election, at least six months after legislative approval |
| Withdrawal | Can be withdrawn by a majority vote of members elected to each house |
| Publication | Proposed amendments by the General Assembly shall be published at least one month before the vote |
| Ballot type | Separate ballot for the proposed amendment |
| Number of amendments | Limited to three Articles of the Constitution at any one election |
| Citizen involvement | Citizens can propose amendments through petitions and express their opinions through advisory questions |
| Examples of amendments | Property tax relief, income tax changes, term limits, election interference, insurance coverage of reproductive services |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Property tax rebate
Illinois has the second-highest property taxes in the country. In 2024, Illinois voters were asked to consider whether millionaires should be taxed more to fund property tax relief. The ballot question was a non-binding referendum that sought to amend the Illinois Constitution to impose an additional 3% tax on incomes over $1 million to be used for property tax relief. The referendum aimed to generate $4.5 billion in property tax rebates and address the state's upside-down tax system.
The 2024 referendum was not the first time Illinois voters had been surveyed on this issue. In 2020, a ballot measure to change the state Constitution and implement a graduated income tax was rejected by voters. The 2024 referendum, however, was non-binding, meaning that regardless of the outcome, the Constitution would not change, income taxes would not increase, and property taxes would not decrease.
The purpose of the 2024 referendum was to gauge voter sentiment and provide guidance to lawmakers on potential future tax reforms. Despite the non-binding nature of the referendum, it could influence future policy decisions and shape another vote for a constitutional amendment in 2026. The outcome of the referendum is expected to send a message about the burden of property taxes in Illinois and provide insight into the tax reform desired by constituents.
The referendum has sparked debates and differing opinions. Some argue that it could hurt the state and drive people away from Illinois, while others believe it is a way to provide much-needed property tax relief to residents. The referendum also raises questions about the potential impact on taxpayers who earn less than $1 million annually.
Understanding Colorado's Amendment 71: Voting Power Explained
You may want to see also
Graduated income tax
In 2020, Illinois voters rejected a constitutional amendment that would have replaced the state's flat income tax with a graduated income tax. Gov. Pritzker's Fair Tax proposal aimed to reform Illinois's tax system to raise the revenue needed to stabilize the state's finances and improve the quality of life for its residents. Illinois currently has one of the most unfair tax systems in the country, with the lowest-income residents paying a 14.4% effective tax rate, nearly double the 7.4% rate paid by the richest 1%.
The Fair Tax proposal would have provided tax relief to 97% of taxpayers, or anyone making less than $250,000 per year. This would have been achieved by lowering the tax burden for low and middle earners while increasing taxes on the wealthy by a few percentage points. For example, in 2014, voters approved an advisory referendum that placed a 3% tax on incomes exceeding $1 million to provide more resources to school districts.
The proposal also aimed to address Illinois' financial crisis and improve the state's fiscal stability. According to Sen. Don Harmon, the plan would have helped to "restore fiscal stability to Illinois and help [the] middle class." The state's outdated tax system has been blamed for Illinois' fiscal crises, with the current system being unfair to the middle class. By asking the wealthy to pay their fair share, the state could have offset tax cuts for low and middle-income families, stimulating economic growth and improving the state's financial situation.
However, the 2020 proposal faced opposition, notably between billionaires Citadel founder Ken Griffin and Gov. Pritzker, with Griffin ultimately prevailing. Despite the rejection of the graduated income tax proposal, the state continues to explore ways to reform its tax system and provide relief to taxpayers burdened by high property taxes. For instance, in 2024, voters will consider a ballot question on whether to amend the Illinois Constitution to create an additional 3% tax on income greater than $1 million, with the funds dedicated to property tax relief.
The Power of Youth: Voting Rights and the 26th Amendment
You may want to see also
Term limits
The Illinois Constitution provides for amendment through citizen-initiated referendums. However, changes are limited to "structural and procedural subjects contained in Article IV", which covers the makeup and powers of the legislature.
In 2014, over 590,000 voters petitioned for an amendment that would impose an eight-year term limit on state lawmakers. The Illinois Term Limits for Legislators Amendment was supported by 80% of Illinoisans. However, it was disqualified by multiple court rulings and deemed unconstitutional. The Illinois First District Appellate Court upheld the lower court's ruling, with Judge Maureen Connors stating that the state supreme court had characterised term limits as a matter of "eligibility or qualifications of an individual legislator".
The Committee for Legislative Reform and Term Limits, which supported the amendment, argued that Illinois citizens were demanding an end to the era of career politicians. Mark Campbell, of the committee, said:
> "Illinois citizens across all spectrums are demanding change in Springfield and want a return to real public service by citizen legislators and an end to the era of career politicians in Springfield."
In 2024, Illinois lawmakers considered expanding the power for citizens to amend the constitution through petitions, including for issues such as term limits. State Rep. Tim Ozinga filed House Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 18 to expand potential amendments beyond issues that are “structural and procedural”.
The Amendment That Gave DC Electoral Votes
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Election interference laws
In 2024, Illinois voters were asked to consider three advisory referendum questions, including one on election interference laws. This non-binding question asked voters whether candidates appearing on the Illinois ballot should be subject to civil penalties if they interfere or attempt to interfere with an election worker's official duties. The question applied to candidates for federal, state, or local office.
The inclusion of this question on the ballot was met with some criticism. Some lawmakers suggested that it was a tactic to draw voters to the polls and gauge public opinion, rather than a serious proposal for a constitutional amendment. Indeed, the question had no legal effect on the state's laws, and Illinois law already includes several prohibitions and penalties against interfering with elections. For example, any person who knowingly fails or refuses to comply with any lawful order of an election authority is guilty of a Class A misdemeanour.
Despite the non-binding nature of the referendum question, it sparked discussion and debate around election interference laws in Illinois. The question of whether candidates should face civil penalties for interfering with election workers' duties is a complex one, and it remains to be seen whether any further action will be taken on this issue beyond the advisory referendum.
It is worth noting that, in the same year, a separate piece of legislation regarding election interference in Illinois was deemed unconstitutional. Senate Bill 2412, nicknamed the "Katie Stuart Protection Act" by House Republicans, sought to end the practice of allowing local party organizations to appoint candidates to the ballot in uncontested legislative races. This bill was challenged in court and ruled unconstitutional by the Illinois Supreme Court, as it was found to impermissibly burden the plaintiffs' rights by changing the rules during the election process.
Constitutional Amendments: Voting Rights Impact
You may want to see also
Insurance coverage of reproductive services
The Reproductive Health Act (RHA) in Illinois gives each person the fundamental right to make individual decisions about their reproductive health. This includes the right to use or refuse reproductive health care, such as contraception, sterilization, abortion, birthing decisions, and maternity care. The RHA also prohibits singling out certain types of reproductive health care for special restrictions without a valid medical reason. For instance, Illinois law previously mandated that abortions be performed in mini-hospital facilities, despite abortions being safe procedures that do not require such settings.
The RHA, which came into effect on June 12, 2019, applies to all persons in Illinois and reproductive health care services provided in the state. The insurance coverage requirement within the RHA applies to health insurance plans issued in Illinois after this date. The RHA guarantees private insurance coverage for abortion services and requires that if a private health insurance policy covers pregnancy-related care, it must also cover abortion costs. Additionally, local government employers offering health insurance plans must provide coverage for contraceptives and abortion services if they offer pregnancy-related benefits.
In 2024, Illinois voters are considering ballot questions on reproductive health, including a proposal to amend the state constitution. One question asks whether all medically appropriate assisted reproductive treatments, such as in vitro fertilization, should be covered by any health insurance plan in Illinois that provides coverage for pregnancy benefits, without limiting the number of treatments. This question arises from Senate Bill 2412, which instructs election officials to include it on ballots.
The RHA has been significant in protecting reproductive rights in Illinois, particularly after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. The state has taken steps to ensure that abortion remains legal and accessible, with Governor Pritzker signing a reproductive rights and gender-affirming care omnibus bill. This bill protects health care providers and their patients from legal attacks by neighboring states and expands health care access and options. It also ensures insurance coverage for necessary reproductive care, including abortion medications, PEP/PrEP, and gender-affirming care, at no extra cost to consumers.
Amending the Constitution: Who Approves?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Amendments to the Illinois Constitution must be approved by a three-fifths vote of the members elected to each house of the General Assembly. Amendments must be limited to "structural and procedural" changes.
In 2024, Illinois voters considered an advisory question on whether to amend the constitution to create an additional 3% tax on income greater than $1,000,000 to fund property tax relief. In 2016, over 560,000 Illinois voters signed a petition to amend the constitution to take away responsibility from state lawmakers for drawing their own legislative district maps, but this effort failed as it was not considered a "structural and procedural" change.
A petition for an amendment must contain the text of the proposed amendment and the date of the general election at which the amendment will be submitted. The petition must be signed by electors and filed with the Secretary of State at least six months before the election. If the petition is valid, the proposed amendment will be submitted to the electors at the election and must be approved by a three-fifths vote of those voting on the amendment or a majority of those voting in the election.
