House approves constitutional amendment raising threshold for wildlife initiatives to two-thirds

First substitute Senate Joint Resolution 10, a proposed amendment to the Utah Constitution, drew extended floor debate before the House approved it by a recorded vote of 52 yes to 19 no.

The sponsor told the House the resolution responds to initiative campaigns in other states and local petition activity aimed at altering wildlife-management practices. He said the measure would not make it harder to get an initiative on the ballot but would require a two-thirds vote to overturn wildlife-board decisions once an initiative reached the ballot. "If we want to overturn our ... wildlife management by valid initiative, it should be raised to a higher standard," the sponsor said during his remarks.

Opponents argued the resolution improperly elevates wildlife-management initiatives above all other ballot issues and risks setting a precedent for special supermajorities. Representative Aaron said, "No voter initiative regardless of the issue should want more than a simple majority of our citizens' vote," urging colleagues to leave initiative thresholds uniform across issues. Representative Carlson and others questioned the premise that "good science" can be objectively defined for purposes of imposing a higher threshold.

Backers defended the measure on constitutional and legal grounds; one member cited the U.S. Supreme Court case Gordon v. Lance (1971) as precedent in arguments that the federal constitution does not prohibit supermajority requirements for certain ballot measures. Sponsors said the amendment is intended to protect current wildlife-management systems that rely on regional advisory councils, biological data and public input.

After debate and a motion to close discussion, the House adopted the resolution. The clerk recorded 52 yes and 19 no; the resolution was publicly read and ordered entered on the Journal and will proceed through the constitutional amendment process.