iowastatedaily.com · Linda Serra Hagedorn · September 7, 2026
Hagedorn: Vote NO on Amendment 1 to the Iowa Constitution – Iowa State Daily
# Hagedorn: Vote NO on Amendment 1 to the Iowa Constitution
Linda Serra Hagedorn, Author
September 7, 2026
Linda Serra Hagedorn is Co-President of the League of Women Voters of Iowa and Past President of the League of Women Voters of Ames and Story County.
This November, Iowa voters will be asked to decide Amendment 1, a proposal to amend the Iowa Constitution to require a two-thirds vote in both the Iowa House and Senate before individual or corporate income-tax rates could be increased.
The proposal may sound appealing at first. Iowans understandably want careful stewardship of tax dollars and accountable government. But Amendment 1 is not simply about today’s tax rates. It is about whether we should permanently limit the ability of future Iowans and their elected representatives to respond to needs we cannot yet foresee.
A vote NO does not raise taxes. It does not change a single tax rate today. It simply preserves the normal democratic process in which elected officials debate public needs, make decisions by majority vote and answer to the voters for those decisions.
Iowa’s current fiscal picture is important to this discussion. The state has been able to reduce taxes while drawing down substantial reserves and surplus funds accumulated during years when revenues exceeded expenditures. That may be a reasonable policy choice in the present moment. But it should not be confused with a guarantee that the same resources will always be available.
Surpluses do not last forever. They are temporary by definition. They can be depleted through tax cuts, increased costs, economic downturns, natural disasters, changing federal policy or other unexpected demands on the state budget.
Iowa’s Constitution, however, is meant to endure. Constitutional amendments are deliberately difficult to reverse. If Amendment 1 is approved, its effects would remain long after today’s surplus has been spent down — perhaps 10, 20 or 30 years from now.
No one can know what Iowa’s circumstances will be then. Future Iowans may face challenges we cannot predict today: declining revenues, higher costs for educating children, aging roads and bridges, public-health emergencies, workforce shortages or new responsibilities for public safety and care of vulnerable residents.
When that day comes, future legislators should be able to consider all responsible options. If a majority of the elected representatives of Iowa conclude that the state needs additional income-tax revenue to meet essential obligations, they should be able to act and then be held accountable by voters in the next election.
Amendment 1 would make that far more difficult. It would require a two-thirds vote in both chambers, giving a minority of legislators the ability to block action even if a clear majority believes it is necessary. That is not simply a call for careful deliberation; it is a permanent minority veto over one important part of Iowa’s revenue system.
Iowans can support low taxes and responsible budgeting without tying the hands of future generations. It is one thing to make tax policy decisions based on Iowa’s present financial condition. It is another to use a temporary surplus as justification for a permanent constitutional restriction.
The Iowa of the future deserves the same ability to govern itself that Iowans have today. We should not assume that a surplus will always be there, or that future needs will be less demanding than our own.
For the sake of flexibility, democratic accountability, and Iowa’s long-term ability to meet the needs of its people, I urge a NO vote on Amendment 1.
Self-Written Bio:
Linda Serra Hagedorn is Co-President of the League of Women Voters of Iowa and Past President of the League of Women Voters of Ames and Story County. She is a Professor Emeritus at Iowa State and former Associate Dean of the College of Health and Human Sciences.