Only Two Groups Have Submitted Signatures for 2026 Ballot Initiatives. They Aim at Very Different Issues.

This story was produced by the Oregon Journalism Project, a nonprofit newsroom covering the state.

Setting aside the gas tax referral now apparently headed for the May election, citizens have proposed a raft of ballot initiatives for November 2026—75 so far.

But only two campaigns have turned in signatures—for wildly different measures with, so far, wildly different results. That’s according to the monthly signature turn-in log that Secretary of State Tobias Read’s Elections Division maintains.

One campaign—built around a measure advancing animal rights—has spent relatively little but gathered a lot of signatures, despite promoting concepts alien to large swaths of the state, both rural and urban.

The other campaign—built around promoting human rights—champions some constitutional changes a majority of Oregonians support, but nonetheless has turned in few signatures, despite a long lead time and spending well over $1 million.

Here’s a snapshot of both initiatives:

Initiative Petition 28

What is it? The People for the Elimination of Animal Cruelty Exemptions, or PEACE, Act would eliminate animal cruelty exemptions in current Oregon law, and dramatically change the face of agriculture, farming and fishing in Oregon, not to mention pushing equally dramatic changes in Oregonians’ diets.

How would it change Oregon law? IP 28 would criminalize “any activity—other than self-defense and veterinary practices—that intentionally injures, kills, or sexually violates a nonhuman animal.” That means no killing animals for food, either commercially or recreationally, and no elective animal husbandry, such as artificial insemination, castration or dehorning. Forget about burgers made from Oregon beef, Willamette Valley lamb, or steelhead from the Deschutes River. The goal of the measure, says co-chief petitioner David Michelson, is to spare any sentient, nonhuman creature from suffering—and shift Oregonians’ diets away from animal protein.

Who’s behind it? Michelson, 32, a substitute teacher at Portland Public Schools, previously filed two similar initiatives in 2020 and 2022. He says he first got interested in animal rights as a college student and realized that if he could change Oregon laws to remove about 10 exemptions, animals could lead entirely different lives.

How much money has the campaign spent? $244,000. Leading contributors include the Craig’s List Charitable Fund ($30,000) and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals ($10,000).

How many signatures have they submitted? 92,088. The threshold for a statutory change is 117,173 valid signatures by July 2, so the PEACE Act has a pretty good chance of making the ballot.

What do stakeholders say? Michelson says he’s “under no illusion that IP 28 will pass this year,” but making the ballot would start a conversation that he hopes will eventually lead to success. He likens the effort, which has parallels to initiatives in California and Colorado, to the women’s suffrage movement, which took many elections to succeed. “I think it will help people think differently,” Michelson says. “If we can force a vote, we normalize the conversation.” Agricultural organizations in the state, ranging from small groups such as Friends of Family Farmers to the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association, see the PEACE Act as an existential threat. “Not only is this effort misguided, but it would also criminalize many aspects of agriculture, from the production of animal-based foods and recreational activities to pest control,” says Lauren Kuenzi of the Oregon Farm Bureau. “This is nothing more than an attack on those who adhere to strict animal care standards designed to keep animals healthy and safe.”

Initiative Petition 33

What is it? It’s also called the Equal Rights for All initiative. In 2023, in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, Democratic lawmakers planned to refer a constitutional amendment that would protect abortion, same-sex marriage, and transgender rights. They dropped that referral to entice Republicans to return to Salem from a walkout. This initiative is an attempt to move the same package of civil rights protections to the ballot via signature gathering.

How would it change Oregon law? Unlike IP 28, which would change statutes written by legislators, IP 33 proposes to amend the Oregon Constitution to safeguard abortion, same-sex marriage, and transgender rights. In the words of the campaign, the initiative would respond to national threats to various rights that exist in Oregon law by strengthening legal protection for “sexual orientation and same-gender marriage; gender identity; and the right to make private, personal decisions about reproductive and gender-related health care, including abortion and health care for transgender people.”

Who’s behind it? The American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon, Basic Rights Oregon, Planned Parenthood Action of Oregon, Latino Network, and other civil rights groups.

How much money has the campaign spent? $1.3 million, much of it in-kind staff time from the ACLU of Oregon. In other words, ACLU employees have worked on the campaign and the value of those work hours is disclosed as contributions. (Leading contributors include the ACLU and affiliates, $665,000; Basic Rights Oregon and affiliates, $199,000; and Planned Parenthood and affiliates, $120,000.)

How many signatures has the campaign submitted? Just 12,194. Equal Rights for All kicked off its campaign in June 2024 with a press conference that drew wide coverage, and started turning in signatures in May 2025, making the results so far underwhelming. To make matters worse for the backers, the requirement to qualify a constitutional amendment for the ballot is much higher than the bar for a statutory change. The campaign needs to submit 156,231 valid signatures (also by July 2) to qualify for November.

What do stakeholders say? IP 33 campaign staff directed questions about the initiative to the ACLU of Oregon, which declined to comment. There is no organized opposition to the campaign, but John Horvick, a pollster for DHM Research in Portland, says that while polling shows Oregonians solidly support the rights to abortion and same-sex marriage, they are less supportive of transgender rights. The idea of children seeking gender reassignment is particularly divisive. About a year ago, Horvick adds, DHM polled Oregonians on a variety of issues. “Of the issues we asked about, Oregonians said transgender issues were the least important to them,” Horvick says. “That may speak to the difficulty of gathering signatures.”