We began this debate over Constitutional Measure 1 between Grafton businessman James Kerian and North Dakota Watchdog Network director Dustin Gawrylow by asking why voters should—or shouldn't—raise the threshold required to amend the state constitution. "The whole point of having a constitution in our form of government is to have something that is a little more stable, a little more firm at the foundation of our state government," Kerian, who was selected by the pro-Measure 1 group Strong ND to represent the affirmative side, said. "Measure 1 protects our constitution and those constitutional rights by ensuring that, going forward, any changes to the state constitution will have the support of at least six out of every 10 voters." Gawrylow, an activist who has worked on initiated measure campaigns for over a decade, argued that changing the threshold upends the core function of the citizen petition process. "The constitution exists to limit government, not to limit the people," Gawrylow, who was selected by the anti-Measure 1 campaign to represent their views in this debate, said. "When you increase the threshold from a simple majority to 60%, you are empowering the minority—the 40% plus one—to have a filibuster over the 59%." This debate was part of a series of Plain Talk debates between candidates for U.S. House, superintendent, agriculture commissioner, public service commissioner, as well as proponents and opponents of Measures 1 and 2. All of the debates will be available as they release on WDAY Xtra, the Plain Talk YouTube channel, as well as podcast platforms including Spotify and Apple Podcasts. A major clash in the debate centered on out-of-state political spending. Kerian pointed to the millions of dollars pouring in to defeat Measure 1 from The Fairness Project, a Washington, D.C.-based progressive organization. "They tell us in their fundraising letters to their own donors that constitutional ballot measures are how the progressives, how their left-wing agenda, stays on offense in red states," Kerian said, arguing the group has targeted states like Missouri, Montana, and Nebraska and is now eyeing North Dakota. "Voters should ask themselves: Why is all this money coming from an out-of-state organization to attack Measure 1?" Gawrylow agreed that out-of-state money in ballot campaigns is a legitimate concern, but argued Measure 1 does nothing to stop it. If anything, he argued, raising the threshold to 60% will simply require campaigns to raise even more outside cash to run statewide TV air wars, while freezing out regular North Dakotans who lack national funding networks. He also claimed that Strong ND is operating as a dark-money fund backed by establishment political leaders. "The folks that were behind those property tax elimination measures didn't have a bunch of money coming in from out of state," Gawrylow said. "We're going to punish the people that are not part of that process because of the bad actors." When asked whether the measure was a solution in search of a problem, the participants reviewed historical election results. Over the past 20 years, North Dakota voters have approved 19 constitutional amendments, and 15 of them passed with more than 60% of the vote—including the 2022 term limits measure. Kerian argued that data shows 60% is a reasonable and proven bar for popular, broad-consensus policy. "Good ideas, as your reporting demonstrated, can easily clear that number," Kerian said. "That's not some change that makes it impossible to change the constitution." Gawrylow countered that the push is the latest in a 15-year pattern of the Republican-controlled Legislature trying to insulate itself from voter accountability. He cited legislative efforts to impose single-subject rules, create legislative vetoes over citizen measures, and require constitutional amendments to pass across two separate elections. "The Legislature does not like the citizens telling them what to do," Gawrylow said, describing the citizen initiative process as a crucial "pressure-relief valve" for voters. The debate also addressed whether Measure 1 is driven by social issues like abortion. Kerian acknowledged that outside groups have used constitutional amendments to expand abortion access in other red states, but maintained that Measure 1 is about fundamental stability rather than a single policy topic. Gawrylow argued that proponents are leaning heavily on culture-war advertisements regarding abortion and transgender issues to convince conservatives to surrender their own initiative rights. If you want to participate in Plain Talk, just give us a call or text at 701-587-3141. It's super easy — leave your message, tell us your name and where you're from, and we might feature it on an upcoming episode. To subscribe to Plain Talk, search for the show wherever you get your podcasts. #northdakota