In the 2026 midterm elections, Colorado voters will have the opportunity to change several elements of the state’s election procedure, potentially impacting future elections for years to come.

Amendment 84

Amendment 84 would require voters to provide their signature and identification number, such as the last four digits of their Social Security number, Colorado driver’s license number or state identification card number when casting their ballot by mail.

The measure would require election officials to compare the identification information to the statewide voter registration database. If there is a discrepancy in the information, the voter would be notified so they could correct the discrepancy by providing a copy of their identification. If the discrepancy is not corrected, then the ballot would not be counted.

The measure was filed by Republican and former El Paso County election official Chuck Broerman and Suzanne Taheri, who works at West Group, a Colorado law and policy center.

According to the Colorado Sun, the Colorado Voter Trust Initiative got Prop 133 on the 2026 ballot using signature circulators — people who are paid to gather signatures for a citizen initiative. The committee received $6,600,000 in funding from Coalition for American Prosperity and Growth, an organization that does not disclose where it acquires its money.

Proponents for the measure argue it will help guarantee a voter’s identity.

“Amendment 84 protects voters against the vulnerabilities that occur when ballots are mailed to an outdated address and should increase faith in our election process,” the Independence Institute’s website reads; the group is one public supporter of Amendment 84.

Opponents, like the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, argue the measure violates voters’ privacy rights.

“Colorado’s elections are already safe and secure,” the ACLU voter guide reads. “Adding flawed and arbitrary ID requirements threatens access to the ballot box and introduces a sweeping set of unintended consequences.”

Amendment 85

Amendment 85 would require ballot questions to be written in “plain language at no more than an eighth-grade reading level,” thus prohibiting future Colorado statutes from instituting language conflicting with these requirements.

Proponents of the measure argue it is an accessibility tool for voters in making ballots more comprehensible, helping readers understand the intent of the measure.

“If you look at people who might have English as a second language or have disabilities (or) even people who don’t, it just makes it more accessible for them,” said Michael Fields, the president of the Advance Colorado, which brought the amendment forward, in a recent podcast episode.

Opponents of the measure argue the measure would remove key information from ballot language. New Era Colorado, a progressive youth civic engagement organization, said in their ballot guide it may make it more difficult to understand the impact of the measure.

“Amendment 85 is put on by wealthy interest groups to purposely leave out important information from ballot measures,” the website reads. “If passed, there will be no more tables showing fiscal impact or additional information on how a ballot measure would impact you.”

Matthew Hitt, a professor political science at Colorado State University, said the measure would make it more difficult to get citizen-initiated measures on the ballot at all.

“I think what (the measure) will do is it will add a layer of litigation to most ballot initiatives that come up in Colorado,” Hitt said. “It’s an extra cost for groups who are trying to get things on the ballot, and it could make it very difficult for groups who want to run ballot initiatives that relate to things like taxes and finance or other technical areas to run their ballot initiatives at all.”

Amendment 86

Amendment 86 is another measure brought forward by Advance Colorado. The measure would require any mid-decade congressional redistricting in Colorado to be approved by both the state’s independent redistricting commission and the Colorado Supreme Court, prohibiting changes to the final map unless “at least three public meetings are held, the modifications do not have the effect of dividing communities of interest or purposefully favoring one political party and are approved by the congressional redistricting commission and the Colorado Supreme Court,” according to the ballot language.

The measure comes amid an unprecedented nationwide redistricting trend, with PBS reporting districts have been changed for one-tenth of Americans since the 2024 elections.

Proponents of the measure like The Independence Institute argue the measure will reject efforts by the “Democrat-controlled Colorado legislature” to redistrict in the state.

“Amendment 86 ensures that such mid-cycle gerrymandering attempts are clearly prohibited,” the website reads. “Colorado’s current redistricting process may not be perfect, but it’s probably better than all of its preceding versions.”

Opponents of the measure like the Shad Murib, chair of the Colorado Democratic Party who spoke on the issue in a recent interview with CPR, argue the measure seeks to “disarm Colorado” and efforts would be better focused increasing the independent redistricting commission’s independence and keeping it free from outside influences like lobbying.

With election day rapidly approaching, Hitt emphasized the importance of looking closely into each measure before voting.

“It’s incumbent on all Colorado voters to try and do our diligence to figure out what’s going on and what this would do and what its consequences and maybe unintended consequences would be,” Hitt said.

Reach Abby Barson at news@collegian.com or on social media @RMCollegian.