What Are the Arguments for and Against Supermajorities?
Supermajority requirements have been a controversial question since the founding of American democracy. Recently, state legislatures have moved to impose them on the ballot measure process. Supporters say supermajorities protect against hasty or narrow changes to laws and constitutions because they require a high vote threshold for passage. Critics say supermajorities hand veto power to a minority of voters and undermine one of democracy's most basic principles: that the side with more votes wins. Some supermajority thresholds mean that 59% of voters could support a ballot measure – and still lose.
Here's a look at both sides of the debate.
What Is a Supermajority, and How Does It Differ from Majority Rule?
Under majority rule, a measure passes when more than half of voters — 50% plus one — support it. This is the standard for the vast majority of elections and most ballot measures in the United States, and it reflects the founding democratic principle of majority rule.
A supermajority requirement raises that bar for passage above 50%. Common thresholds are 60%, two-thirds (67%), or three-quarters (75%).
What Are the Arguments Against Supermajority Requirements?
They create minority rule. The most direct criticism of supermajority requirements is mathematical: they allow a minority of voters to override a majority, which many consider undemocratic. In a 60% supermajority system, 40% of voters — plus one vote — can permanently block a policy that most voters want. That's not consensus-building; it's a veto power for the minority side.
They entrench the status quo. Because supermajority rules make change harder, they tend to protect existing laws and power structures — regardless of whether those structures reflect current public opinion. If the status quo was set by a past majority, a supermajority requirement can make it nearly impossible for a new majority to update it.
They undermine the principle of majority rule. The concept of majority rule is simple: the side with the most supporters wins. Supermajority requirements effectively give more weight to "No" votes than "Yes" votes, which critics argue violates the foundational democratic principle that all voters should have equal power.
In low-turnout elections, a very small number of people can form the blocking minority. When constitutional amendments can appear on primary ballots or special elections — where turnout is far lower than in general elections — the absolute number of voters needed to block a popular amendment can be very small. In North Dakota, for example, using recent turnout data, it's calculated that as few as 7.6% of eligible voters could constitute the 40%-plus-one blocking share in a June primary election. In South Dakota, based on turnout numbers from the 2026 Primary Election, a 60% supermajority requirement would mean as few as 68,625 South Dakotans — just 13.8% of registered voters, or 1 in 7 — could block a constitutional amendment supported by the other 86.2%.
Past election results show voters across party lines prefer majority rule. Regardless of political affiliation, voters consistently demonstrate a preference for simple majority rule as a matter of basic fairness. Voters in the following states have been asked whether to adopt a supermajority requirement for ballot measures. They rejected it:
- South Dakota, 2018, Amendment X: 53% no
- South Dakota, 2022, Amendment C: 63% no
- Arkansas, 2022, Issue 2: 56% no
- Ohio, 2023, Issue 1: 57% no
- North Dakota, 2024, Constitutional Measure 2: 56% no
What Are the Arguments in Favor of Supermajority Requirements?
They encourage a very broad consensus. Supporters argue that some decisions — particularly changes to a state constitution — should require more than a simple majority to take effect. A constitutional amendment that passes 51% to 49% might reflect a deeply divided electorate rather than a settled social consensus. A higher threshold, the argument goes, ensures that only changes with genuine widespread support become part of a state's foundational law.
could provide stability. Constitutions are meant to be durable, and supermajority requirements are intended to slow the pace of constitutional change by making it harder for voters to pass constitutional amendments.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does a supermajority requirement apply to all elections?
No. Some apply only to citizen-initiated measures, not to legislatively referred measures. Some supermajority requirements apply only to constitutional amendments, not to statutory ballot measures. The specifics vary significantly from state to state.
Is a supermajority requirement the same as minority rule?
In practice, any supermajority threshold gives a minority coalition the power to defeat a majority-supported measure. The higher the threshold, the greater the power of the minority. If 60% is required for passage, a blocking coalition needs only 40% of voters plus one vote to be successful
What is the main argument for a supermajority requirement?
Proponents argue that important decisions — such as changes to a state constitution — should reflect a very broad social consensus rather than a narrow majority.
What is the main argument against a supermajority requirement?
Critics argue that supermajority requirements create minority rule by allowing a smaller group of voters to block policies supported by a majority, undermining the core democratic principle that the side with more votes wins.
