August Hot Sheet: The Growing Need to Invest in the Care Economy

08/20/2025

Welcome back to The Hot Sheet!

Here, we give you a quick rundown of what you need to know about the 2025 ballot measure landscape — the trends, analysis, highlights of what’s on the ballot, and why it all matters. 

For more in-depth analysis, our latest voter attitudes research, and information on the measures we’re tracking, head to our Ballot Measure Hub.

2025 Ballot Measure Landscape

As of August 1, there are 23 measures confirmed for the November 4 ballot in Colorado, Maine, New York, Texas, and Washington. Six measures have already appeared on statewide ballots this spring in Louisiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin. 

As of July 31, BISC is still monitoring 24 active bills across seven states and Washington D.C. related to direct democracy — at least nine of which seek to limit the People’s Tool. 52 bills have already passed in state houses and three others have been vetoed by governors.

The Toplines

• The ongoing trend of states requiring voter ID continues to undermine the groundbreaking Voting Rights Act sixty years after its passage.
• A legislatively-referred measure would allow the WA Cares fund to be invested in stocks and equities, improving the programs financial resiliency.
• Amid growing attempts to further weaken an already inadequate social safety net, advocates are turning to ballot measures to protect and advance the care economy.
• The Missouri Supreme Court paused Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s request for an expedited hearing on the state’s abortion law appeal, instead asking both the reproductive rights advocates and anti-abortion state officials to justify why the court has jurisdiction to hear the case directly.
• Two conservative groups in Montana have filed a second lawsuit to overturn the voter-approved reproductive rights initiative after their first was unanimously rejected by state supreme court justices.

Emerging Trend

Voter ID Requirements Eroding the Spirit of the Voting Rights Act: Sixty years after the groundbreaking passage of the Voting Rights Act, Americans continue to face contrived barriers to engaging in our democracy. One especially pernicious anti-voting trend: voter ID requirements. 36 states currently have such laws in place and three ballot initiatives plus one legislatively-referred measure are looking to enshrine requirements in their state constitutions.

• California Initiative 25-0007: Voter Identification and Voter List Maintenance Requirements Initiative (CI) (2026)
  • Would require government-issued identification to vote in person or last four-digits of a unique government-issued identifying number with mail-in ballot. The initiative would also require the secretary of state and county election officials to maintain accurate voter registration lists, including verifying citizenship attestations and reporting what percent of voter rolls have been citizenship-verified.
• Maine Question 1: An Act to Require an Individual to Present Photographic Identification for the Purpose of Voting (CI) (2025)
  • Would change Maine election laws to eliminate two days of absentee voting, prohibit requests for absentee ballots by phone or family members, end ongoing absentee voter status for seniors and people with disabilities, ban prepaid postage on absentee ballot return envelopes, limit the number of drop boxes, require voters to show certain photo ID before voting, and make other changes to our elections.
• Nevada Question 7: Voter ID Requirement (CI) (2026)
  • This amendment would mandate that Nevada residents must present a form of photo identification to confirm their identity when voting in person, or use the last four digits of their driver’s license or social security number to verify their identity when voting by mail.
  • Note: Question 7 also appeared on the November 2024 ballot. Nevada law requires that constitutional amendments receive voter approval in two elections in order to pass.
• North Carolina Senate Bill 921: An act to amend the North Carolina constitution to require all voters to present photographic identification (LR) (2026)
  • The amendment would require photographic identification to vote, including for those not voting in person.

An October 2024 poll by NPR, PBS, and Marist revealed that many Americans (including 86% of Republicans) are concerned about voter fraud but according to the Brennan Center for Justice, research has shown that such fraud is ‘infinitesimally rare’. And what many might see as a necessary step in defending our elections against this assumed widespread election fraud is just another form of voter disenfranchisement because access to an approved form of voter ID is far from universal. A study published in 2023 by University of Maryland’s Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement in partnership with VoteRiders revealed that nearly 29 million potential voters lacked a valid driver’s license, while more than 7 million lacked any form of valid government-issued photo identification. The issue was especially prominent among voters of color, young voters, voters with disabilities, and seniors. Barriers to identification access go far beyond a long line at the DMV: would-be voters may not have the documentation required to apply for an ID (e.g. a valid copy of their birth certificate), may face harassment regarding updated gender markers, may not be able to afford the fees for a driver’s license or identification card, and more.

At best, voter ID requirements are red tape limiting voter turnout but at worst they are a nefarious attempt to concentrate the power of those voters deemed most desirable.

Ballot Measures to Watch

Issue: Fiscal

Washington: Allow Investment of Long-Term Services and Supports Trust Fund (LR) 

What It Does: The constitutional amendment would allow Washington’s WA Cares fund (a payroll tax-funded, state-run program providing long-term care benefits) to be invested in stocks and equities

Why It Matters: Passed with bipartisan support in the legislature, November’s legislatively-referred measure comes amid growing recognition of WA Cares’ financial scale and long-term potential. Since mid-2023, most Washington workers have contributed 0.58% of their paychecks to the fund — amassing $1.64 billion by the end of 2024 alone. The $36,500 lifetime benefit (adjusted for inflation) will pay out beginning July 2026 and can be used to cover everything from assisted living facilities and in-home care to meal delivery and assistive devices. Should this amendment pass, it would align WA Cares with other state-managed funds like pensions and retirement accounts, which already benefit from diversified investments.

BISC Analysis: The Growing Need to Invest in the Care Economy:  The push to make the WA Cares fund more resilient is evidence of the growing holes in our social safety nets and the need to invest in the care economy. Other examples include ongoing fights in Missouri and Nebraska to defend paid sick leave policies that allow workers to care for themselves and ailing family members, an attempt last year in Missouri to lower childcare providers’ business costs amid a growing affordability crisis, and efforts to expand a free lunch program for Colorado students as food banks reel from federal defunding. 

As Americans continue to read headlines about threats to Medicaid Expansion and rising grocery bills, BISC is working with advocates across the country to explore policy solutions that address gaps in community care. This fall, we will be conducting critical research on the topic to measure voter concern for issues like childcare and paid sick leave, support for possible funding approaches, and more. In doing so, BISC will gain actionable insights into the experiences, needs, and values of the communities most affected by failed policies that negatively impact families and the community at-large.

Updates to 2024 Ballot Measures

Issue: Reproductive Freedom

• • Missouri Amendment 3: Right to Reproductive Freedom (CI) 
    • Legal Challenge: On July 22, the Missouri Supreme Court paused Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s request for an expedited hearing on the state’s abortion law appeal, instead asking both sides to justify why the court has jurisdiction to hear the case directly. Judge Jerri Zhang’s July 3 preliminary injunction allowed surgical abortions to resume in Missouri, but the case remains unresolved and the Supreme Court must now determine if it should bypass the appellate courts. This marks the first time a new state law (Senate Bill 22) granting the attorney general authority to appeal preliminary injunctions is being tested, though the law does not specify which court should hear such appeals.
      
  • Montana CI-128: Right to Abortion (CI)
    • Legal Challenge: The Montana Life Defense Fund and the Montana Family Foundation have filed another lawsuit against CI-128, asking the judge to rule the entire amendment invalid because the full text of the amendment wasn’t printed directly on the ballot. Further, they argue, every amendment passed since 1978 is invalid for the same reasons (though due to the statute of limitations, they’re only targeting CI-128). Notably, the state supreme court has already ruled against that same argument. In their unanimous decision against the previous lawsuit the Montana Supreme Court said that, “The Defense Fund has not demonstrated that the electorate was not provided with the full text of CI-128… And it has not developed the facts necessary to support its legal arguments.”

In Case You Missed It

BISC’s Resource Library: Our Partner Portal Resource Library houses ballot measure information ranging from campaign tools, templates, and past campaign materials (Values, MOUS, RFPs, etc.) —  to campaign debriefs and memos highlighting best practices. This library is a unique resource that can help campaigns and organizations build strategies and operationalize racial equity. To request access to the library, please email [email protected]