Amendment 1Constitutional amendment · Put on the ballot by lawmakers
Two-Thirds Vote for Income Taxes
Explain it like I'm 5
Lawmakers can now raise state income taxes with a little more than half the votes. This would require about two out of every three lawmakers in both chambers, like needing most of a class to agree before changing a rule.
Yes vote
The Iowa Constitution would require two-thirds of both the House and Senate to raise individual or corporate income tax rates or create certain new state income-based taxes.
No vote
The current rule remains, allowing a simple majority in both chambers to raise or create those state income taxes.
The question to ask yourself
Should broad agreement be required to raise state income taxes, or should a simple legislative majority retain more budget flexibility?
The case for
- Tax increases would require broader agreement instead of a narrow majority.
- It could protect recent income-tax cuts from quick reversal.
- Supporters say it encourages lawmakers to control spending before raising taxes.
Backed by: Iowans for Tax Relief, Republican Party of Iowa, Americans for Prosperity, Americans for Tax Reform, Iowa Association of Business and Industry, National Federation of Independent Business
The case against
- A minority could block needed revenue during a budget shortfall or emergency.
- It could push lawmakers toward sales taxes, fees, or spending cuts instead.
- Putting the rule in the Constitution would make future changes harder.
Opposed by: Common Good Iowa, Fair Taxes for Iowa’s Future, Iowa Democratic Party, League of Women Voters of Iowa, Iowa State Education Association, Iowa Federation of Labor AFL-CIO
- Money
- The amendment itself has no direct cost and changes no current tax rate; future tax effects are not estimated.
- Don't be misled
- It does not freeze taxes or ban increases, because lawmakers could still raise covered taxes with two-thirds support and other taxes are outside the rule.