The redistricting referendum in Virginia today exposes a flaw found in other states too: Partisan politicians are allowed to write ballot language. Predictably, they use flattering verbs and politically charged nouns that can mislead voters.
Some states have created laws to avoid this problem, requiring ballot language to be clear, impartial, and state its chief purpose, subject to expedited review by the state supreme court.
The ballot language of Virginia’s referendum asks whether the state should amend its constitution to let the General Assembly “temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections.”
In truth, Democrats’ plan to “restore fairness” could give Democrats control of the U.S. House by granting Republicans only one of the commonwealth’s 11 House seats in a state where President Donald Trump won 46 percent of the vote in 2024.
Even The Washington Post editorial board called the unfair ballot language a “euphemism for the ages.” According to The Post, “Democratic politicians are presenting the proposed amendment to voters in the most brazenly dishonest way imaginable.”
Democrats may counter that their redistricting proposal in Virginia is in response to gerrymandering in other states, but that doesn’t excuse biased ballots.
Some states, including Michigan, Florida, and Colorado, have laws in place to avoid partisan language on ballots, such as requiring expedited state supreme court review. In contrast, in Virginia — and other states such as Mississippi, Tennessee, and West Virginia — the party controlling the legislature can heavily influence how referendum questions are framed.
Shaping Outcome, Destroying Trust
Politicized ballot language further corrodes the public’s trust. Americans deserve a true description of what a proposal would actually do, not to be misled at the last moment. Research has found that positively framed language can move undecided voters.
Polling shows Virginia’s referendum results could be close. Democrats’ ballot language may have its intended effect: Earlier this month, Keren Charles Dongo, campaign manager for Virginians for Fair Elections, the main pro-redistricting campaign in the state, noted that even though Republicans show higher turnout in early voting, the “Yes” campaign is leading in early voting.
Independents’ voting might explain it: Polls show they are more split on the measure, while 95 percent of Republicans are voting no and 92 percent of Democrats are voting yes. But perhaps misleading ballot language is confusing some voters too. After all, a Republican voting for the measure is voting for many Republicans to lose their representation in the House. My own district would likely flip from majority Republican to majority Democrat.
Simple Proposal
With Democrats controlling Virginia’s executive and legislative branches, the state is unlikely to change who writes ballot language soon (28 House Republicans cosponsored such a bill this year, but it didn’t make it out of committee). However, other states should act while they may. Of course, Democrats won’t want biased ballots used against them when they’re in the minority.
Ballot-language reform could be enacted by ordinary statute, not constitutional amendment, thus lowering the threshold of votes needed.
States should create bipartisan ballot-language review commissions charged with drafting concise, neutral summaries for statewide referenda. Each commission’s mandate would be solely to translate legal text into plain English — no persuasive adjectives, claims of motive, or predictions of benefit. The commission’s work should then receive expedited review by the state supreme court, which would only ensure neutrality and compliance with statutory standards.
Background
Keeping ballot language nonpartisan is an easier task than redistricting, as it involves simply using plain English.
In 2020, Virginians gave 66 percent approval to a constitutional amendment to create a bipartisan, 16-member redistricting commission. But it couldn’t agree on a map, so, as required by the 2020 amendment, the supreme court stepped in and created Virginia’s current House map with the help of bipartisan experts.
Now Democrats are seeking to get the new constitutional amendment approved Tuesday. Republicans in Virginia attempted to have the state supreme court block the current referendum, challenging both ballot language and constitutionality. The court chose to let the referendum proceed before deciding the merits of the lawsuit, and it is unlikely to overturn an election after the fact. Virginia’s supreme court members are appointed by both chambers of the legislature, making the judiciary more likely to defer to the legislature. A law requiring expedited state supreme court review of ballot language would avoid this problem.
Democrats in Virginia currently have the balance of power in their favor, but ballot language should not be. Legislation to prevent misleading ballot language would help truly restore fairness.
