![]() |
---|
![]() |
A double referendum on constitutional reform was held in Uruguay on 27 March 1938. Both sets of reforms were approved by voters. [1] [2]
The first set of reforms had been proposed in a constitutional law on 30 December 1936. [1] They would recognise the " lema" system of factions within political parties and allow several presidential candidates for each lema. [1] The most voted for candidate from the most voted for lema would win the presidential election. [1] The law would also reorganise the Senate. [1]
The second set of reforms were put forward by the General Assembly on 24 February 1938. [2] They would restrict each lema to a single candidate for president, as well as reorganising local government. [2] As this was an administrative initiative by two-fifths of the Assembly, a majority of registered voters voting in favour was required. [2] This was achieved, with 52.47% of all registered voters approving the reforms. [2]
Choice | Votes | % |
---|---|---|
For | 333,802 | 93.45 |
Against | 23,385 | 6.55 |
Invalid/blank votes | – | |
Total | 357,187 | 100 |
Registered voters/turnout | 636,171 | |
Source: Direct Democracy |
Choice | Votes | % |
---|---|---|
For | 333,802 | 97.99 |
Against | 6,847 | 2.01 |
Invalid/blank votes | – | |
Total | 340,649 | 100 |
Registered voters/turnout | 636,171 | |
Source: Direct Democracy |
![]() |
---|
![]() |
A double referendum on constitutional reform was held in Uruguay on 27 March 1938. Both sets of reforms were approved by voters. [1] [2]
The first set of reforms had been proposed in a constitutional law on 30 December 1936. [1] They would recognise the " lema" system of factions within political parties and allow several presidential candidates for each lema. [1] The most voted for candidate from the most voted for lema would win the presidential election. [1] The law would also reorganise the Senate. [1]
The second set of reforms were put forward by the General Assembly on 24 February 1938. [2] They would restrict each lema to a single candidate for president, as well as reorganising local government. [2] As this was an administrative initiative by two-fifths of the Assembly, a majority of registered voters voting in favour was required. [2] This was achieved, with 52.47% of all registered voters approving the reforms. [2]
Choice | Votes | % |
---|---|---|
For | 333,802 | 93.45 |
Against | 23,385 | 6.55 |
Invalid/blank votes | – | |
Total | 357,187 | 100 |
Registered voters/turnout | 636,171 | |
Source: Direct Democracy |
Choice | Votes | % |
---|---|---|
For | 333,802 | 97.99 |
Against | 6,847 | 2.01 |
Invalid/blank votes | – | |
Total | 340,649 | 100 |
Registered voters/turnout | 636,171 | |
Source: Direct Democracy |