2026-08-05T22:01:37.115Z / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）
本篇报道刊载于CNN《重要事项》新闻简报。如需免费订阅并将其推送至您的邮箱，请点击此处。
周二初选的重大新闻是前公共卫生官员阿卜杜勒·赛义德在密歇根州民主党联邦参议院初选中以微弱优势获胜——这证明进步派在民主党内部占据上风，即便在这个关键的摇摆州亦是如此。
但另外两项几乎未登上全国新闻头条的选举结果，则揭示了美国政坛的另一趋势：共和党州议会与直接民主之间的关系日益复杂。
在堪萨斯州，选民否决了由该州共和党主导的州议会提交的一项提案。该提案原本旨在剥夺功绩委员会和民主党籍州长任命州最高法院大法官的权力。
提案原本应将选举州最高法院大法官的权力交还给选民，而此前这些大法官一直是共和党主导的州议会的眼中钉。这听起来似乎是赋予选民更多权力，但长期意图却是选举反对堕胎权的法官，以便该法院最终能推翻2022年公民投票倡议中选民所确认的州宪法堕胎权。
简言之：反堕胎活动人士希望借由这项修正案推翻选民维护堕胎权的决议。但选民看穿了这一意图，否决了该提案。
在密苏里州，选民否决了由该州共和党主导的州议会提交的一项议案。该议案原本会大幅提高公民通过征集签名提交 ballot 修正案的难度。
议员们的目标是建立一套双层制度：由选民提议的宪法修正案必须在该州每个国会选区获得通过才能生效，而州议会提议的修正案仍仅需获得全州多数支持即可通过。
重要的额外背景是，密苏里州由共和党主导的政府此前已大幅重划国会选区以利于共和党，包括在今年早些时候撤销了一个民主党席位。
从实际效果来看，这项修改将赋予保守派对民主党或进步派提议的宪法修正案的否决权，即便这些修正案广受欢迎。
近年来，密苏里州选民不仅支持堕胎权，还推动扩大医疗补助计划、提高州最低工资标准，这些都让共和党议员感到挫败。
在税收议题上，密苏里州选民周二否决了州议会提出的逐步取消州所得税、理论上以销售税取而代之的请求，而这正是美国其他地区共和党议会的优先政策。
密苏里州选民将无法就选区重划问题进行投票。该州最高选举官员驳回了一份由数十万选民签名的公民请愿书，该请愿书要求就共和党主导的州政府制定的国会选区方案举行全州投票。支持者已承诺就此决定提起诉讼。
但选民将有机会再次就堕胎权问题进行投票。密苏里州议会正要求选民废除他们在2024年通过的公民倡议修正案，但附加了一项极具政治争议的条款：禁止为18岁以下人群提供跨性别治疗。
选区重划，即为党派利益绘制立法选区地图，常被描述为政客挑选选民，而非反过来。
事实上，共和党在今年史无前例的中期选区重划争夺战中占据上风，部分原因在于他们无需就撤销民主党选区的计划征询选民意见。
在加利福尼亚州和弗吉尼亚州，民主党人重新绘制了选区地图，但按照本州法律要求，他们先在全州公投中征询了选民意见。两州选民都批准了新地图方案，但只有加利福尼亚州的新地图将正式生效。在弗吉尼亚州，州最高法院大法官由州议会任命，其中多数大法官是在共和党控制州议会的年份任命的，他们以新地图未遵循严格程序为由，否决了获得选民支持的方案。
在佛罗里达州，公民倡议修正案通过原本就设有超级多数（60%）门槛。正因如此，2024年尽管多数选民支持恢复部分堕胎权（57.2%）和合法化大麻（55.9%），但两项提案均未成为法律。
为避免再次面临此类问题，该州由共和党主导的州议会和州长罗恩·德桑蒂斯大幅提高了公民发起倡议请愿的难度和成本。今年早些时候生效的新规定要求，未经州政府登记为请愿收集者，收集超过25份倡议签名即构成重罪。
据凯撒家庭基金会（KFF）数据，自“罗诉韦德案”被推翻以来，已有17个州的选民就堕胎权问题在州层面进行了投票，除内布拉斯加州、南达科他州（两地多数选民反对堕胎权）和佛罗里达州（未达到超级多数要求）外，其余各州选民均支持堕胎权。
目前另有五项与堕胎相关的倡议预计将于11月出现在全州选票上。
在多数情况下，分歧存在于公民发起的请愿倡议与州议会提出的议案之间。据美国州议会全国会议数据，约有一半的州允许公民将倡议提案纳入选票。CNN记者弗雷德里卡·舒滕去年曾报道，越来越多的努力试图为这些倡议设置新障碍，而这些倡议往往得到自由派团体的支持，他们在红色州被排除在权力之外。
南达科他州选民将于11月投票决定是否对公民倡议请愿提案设置60%的门槛。南达科他州选民还将再次就医疗补助计划进行投票。2022年，南达科他州选民投票通过扩大针对低收入人群的医疗保险计划，使其与美国其他多数地区根据《奥巴马医改》实施的政策接轨。今年，州议会要求选民在联邦资助减少时放弃该扩张计划。
如果说左翼团体利用倡议程序对抗保守派州议会是一种趋势，也存在例外情况。2024年，加利福尼亚州选民以微弱优势否决了一项将最低工资定为每小时18美元的州法案。
俄克拉荷马州一项旨在提高最低工资的倡议今年早些时候被选民否决。该倡议的支持者感到沮丧，因为州政府将投票时间从11月大选提前到了6月初选。在大多数州，只要有机会，选民都会支持提高最低工资，包括阿肯色州和密苏里州。俄克拉荷马州的投票结果意味着该州将保留联邦最低工资标准每小时7.25美元，这一标准源自2007年的一项法律。预计民主党人将在下次掌控国会多数席位时努力提高这一最低工资底线。
归根结底，选民掌握着权力。他们可以罢免政见不合的议员。但这种权力因被选区重划操纵的立法地图而被削弱，而这种操纵助长了美国政坛的极端党派对立。如果如预期那样，明年重新启动选区重划争夺战，政客们变本加厉地挑选选民而非被选民挑选，那么情况可能会变得更糟。
CNN记者伊桑·科恩对本文亦有贡献。
GOP lawmakers keep trying to defang voters in their own states
2026-08-05T22:01:37.115Z / CNN
A version of this story appeared in CNN’s What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here.
The big headline out of Tuesday’s primaries was the slim victory of former public health official Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary — proof that progressives are ascendant in the party, even in a key swing state.
But two other results that barely registered in the national news chart another trend in US politics: the increasingly complicated relationship between Republican state legislatures and direct democracy.
In Kansas, voters rejected a proposal placed on the ballot by the state’s GOP-dominated legislature that would have taken the power to appoint state Supreme Court justices away from a merit board and the state’s governor, a Democrat.
Instead, the amendment would have given voters power to elect state Supreme Court justices, who have been a thorn in the side of the GOP-dominated legislature. That might sound like voter empowerment, but the longer-term intent was to elect judges opposed to abortion rights so the court might eventually overturn the right to abortion in the state’s constitution, which was affirmed by voters in a 2022 ballot initiative.
Bottom line: Anti-abortion rights activists hoped to use this amendment to overrule voters’ decision to uphold abortion rights. But voters understood this and rejected the move.
In Missouri, voters rejected a measure placed on the ballot by the state’s Republican-dominated legislature that would’ve made it much harder to pass amendments placed on the ballot by citizens gathering signatures.
Legislators’ goal was to create a two-tiered system: Constitutional amendments proposed by voters would have had to win in every congressional district in the state to pass, while amendments proposed by the state legislature would still need just a statewide majority.
The important additional context is that Missouri’s GOP-dominated government has already drastically gerrymandered the state’s congressional districts to benefit Republicans, including by erasing a Democratic seat earlier this year.
Functionally, the change would’ve given conservatives veto power over constitutional amendments proposed by Democrats or progressives, even if they were broadly popular.
It’s not just abortion rights that Missouri voters have endorsed in recent years, frustrating Republican legislators. They also expanded Medicaid and increased the state’s minimum wage.
On taxes, Missouri voters on Tuesday rejected the legislature’s request to phase out the state’s income tax and, in theory, replace it with a sales tax, a priority of Republican legislatures elsewhere in the country.
Missouri voters will not get the opportunity to weigh in on gerrymandering. The state’s top election official denied a citizen petition signed by hundreds of thousands of voters requesting a statewide vote on congressional districts enacted by the state’s GOP-dominated government. Supporters have promised to fight the decision in court.
But voters will be asked to take another look at abortion rights. Missouri’s legislature is asking voters to repeal the citizen-initiated amendment they passed in 2024, but with a tweak, adding in the politically potent issue of banning transgender therapy for people under 18.
Gerrymandering, the drawing of legislative maps for partisan gain, is frequently described as politicians picking voters instead of the other way around.
In fact, Republicans were able to get the upper hand in the unprecedented mid-decade gerrymandering war this year in part because they did not have to consult voters about their plans to erase Democratic districts.
In California and Virginia, Democrats redrew maps, but only after consulting voters in statewide referendums, as their laws required. Voters in both states approved the concept of new maps, but only California’s will go into effect. In Virginia, state Supreme Court justices are appointed by the state legislature and a majority made up mostly of justices appointed in years when Republicans controlled the legislature threw the voter-blessed maps out, ruling they did not adhere to a strict process.
In Florida, there’s already a supermajority requirement (60%) for citizen-initiated amendments to pass. That’s why, in 2024, solid majorities of voters supported restoring some abortion rights (57.2%) and legalizing cannabis (55.9%), but neither became law.
Rather than face such questions again, the state’s GOP-dominated legislature and Gov. Ron DeSantis made it much more difficult and expensive for citizens to add initiatives to the ballot. The new rules, enacted earlier this year, make it a felony to gather more than 25 signatures in support of an initiative without first registering with the state as a petition circulator.
In the 17 states where voters have been asked to weigh in on abortion rights at the state level since Roe v. Wade was overturned, according to KFF, voters have supported abortion rights in all but three instances, in Nebraska and South Dakota, where majorities opposed abortion rights, and in Florida, where the supermajority requirement was not met.
Five more abortion-related initiatives are currently expected to appear on statewide ballots in November.
In many of these instances, the divide is between ballot initiatives proposed by citizens and those proposed by the state’s legislature. Citizens have the ability to place initiatives on the ballot in about half of states, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. CNN’s Fredreka Schouten wrote last year about the surge of efforts to put new hurdles in front of these efforts, which are frequently backed by liberal groups who feel locked out of power in red states.
South Dakota voters will vote in November on whether to impose a 60% threshold on citizen-initiated ballot initiatives. South Dakota voters will also take another crack at Medicaid. In 2022, South Dakotans voted to expand the program offering health insurance to low-income people, bringing it in line with most of the rest of the country under Obamacare. This year, the legislature is asking the voters to drop that expansion if federal funding drops.
If the trend is for left-leaning groups to use the initiative process to counter conservative legislatures, there are exceptions. California voters in 2024 narrowly rejected a state law that would have created an $18 per hour minimum wage.
An initiative that would have raised the minimum wage in Oklahoma was rejected by voters earlier this year. Supporters of the initiative were frustrated that the state’s leaders moved the question to the June primary rather than the November general election. Voters in most states, given the chance, have supported minimum wage hikes, including in Arkansas and Missouri. Oklahoma’s vote means it will retain the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, the product of a 2007 law. Look for Democrats to try to raise that floor the next time they hold majorities in Congress.
Voters, ultimately, hold the power. They could throw out the legislators they disagree with. But that power is muted by gerrymandered legislative maps that feed hyper-partisanship in US politics. It could all get worse if, as expected, the redistricting war restarts next year and politicians do even more to pick their voters instead of the other way around.
CNN’s Ethan Cohen contributed to this report.
发表回复