While most voters focused on the marquee races in November, an amendment to North Carolina’s constitution quietly appeared on ballots across the state. It passed with ease, except in Orange and Durham Counties, where it was met with sound rejection. This stark divide raises a pressing question: how many voters truly understood what they were asked to decide? 

Along with state and federal office vacancies this year, Durham voters were asked to decide on a constitutional amendment and a series of bond measures that will impact the state for years to come. House Bill 1074 aimed to amend the North Carolina constitution language pertaining to eligible voters. 

The current language writes, “Every person born in the United States and every person who has been naturalized, 18 years of age, and possessing the qualifications set out in this Article, shall be entitled to vote at any election by the people of the State, except as herein otherwise provided.” In November, the following was on the ballot: “Constitutional amendment to provide that only a citizen of the United States who is 18 years of age and otherwise possessing the qualifications for voting shall be entitled to vote at any election in this State.” Durham was asked to vote for or against this measure. 

According to Politico, the amendment passed with approximately 78% of North Carolina in favor and 22% of North Carolina dissenting. Almost every county saw similar numbers within its area, 98 in favor– only Orange and Durham counties saw a close race. In Orange County, approximately 52% of voters were against the amendment; in Durham County, 53% of voters were opposed. 

This amendment is not unique to North Carolina. Iowa, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Idaho, Oklahoma, Nevada, South Carolina, and Missouri passed amendments to change the language of their constitution to permit “citizens-only” to vote. 

The ballot seems easy to cast. The language of the amendment would be similar to its original verbiage. But there has been discourse about its intentions. Democracy North Carolina argues the amendment is dangerous because it “creates confusion”, and North Carolina Asian Americans Together notes it may “bring the voting rights of naturalized citizens into question”.

If you couldn’t vote before this amendment was passed, you still can’t. And if you could vote before the amendment was approved, you still can. So why has this ballot measure made its rounds across red states this electoral cycle? The tweaking of the language is just subtle enough to fan the flames of unsubstantiated concerns about widespread yet undiscovered voting fraud in immigrant-rich communities. 

“You can’t take these amendments for what you think they say versus how they’re going to be used,” says Felecia Robinson, Fundraising Chair for Durham Democrats. “Those are the types of things– on its face, it looks like it makes sense, but there was not the education going in these rural counties and these rural communities. […] Nobody’s thinking about the in-between things that could happen with an amendment like that […], but in the real scheme of things, how are we going to use this to discriminate, to harm people that are already here?”

Counties that voted similarly to Orange and Durham, such as Mecklenburg, went rogue on the constitutional amendment. But, notably, Orange and Durham Counties are home to some of the most educated populations in the state and a plethora of institutions to give its citizens opportunities to educate themselves. 

“You’ve got two of the most educated counties that voted against something because they knew what the far-reaching ramifications could be,” says Robinson. 

Education is the crux of this issue. While the presidential and governor races dominated the screens, newspapers, and your neighbors’ yards this election year, this constitutional amendment snuck under the radar for many voters. University environments are unique in the teeming presence of organizations and nonprofits that are eager to educate and inspire. The average voter, however, is not always within reach of such helpful efforts.

“Most people, the average person, would never get connected with that information,” Robinson says. “It felt very intentional, because […] it sounds like, ‘Okay, that makes sense to me’, but it doesn’t. Sometimes you vote for things that [should make you think] okay, why is that a new law?”

Voters should know exactly what they will read on their ballots on Election Day. North Carolinians should be as familiar with the leading races as they are with amendments and bonds. Orange and Durham Counties seem to have caught on, but education should not be limited to areas in which most colleges lie. A nearly unilateral sweep indicates that not everyone may have been privy to the same information.