That reflects the way voting issues combine both deeply political impulses and largely practical ones.

“There are voting reforms which trigger partisan sensibilities, and then there are those that respond to people’s desire to have a modern, efficient and nonbureaucratic process,” said Nathaniel Persily, a Stanford University law professor and elections scholar. “People want options. They don’t want to be forced to go to a polling place; they want to be able to vote from home. Right now, when people can conduct their entire lives on their phone, they wonder why they have to go to a 19th century polling place to cast a ballot.”

Several of the measures sparked partisan battles, like Michigan’s Proposal 2, which created a commission to draw district lines, and Issue 2 in Arkansas, which requires voters to have photo identification and was opposed by the American Civil Liberties Union.

The A.C.L.U. also targeted Kris Kobach, the Kansas secretary of state and candidate for governor who became a villain among liberals after repeatedly making spurious claims about widespread voter fraud. While the A.C.L.U. does not officially endorse or oppose specific candidates, it made its feelings clear in Mr. Kobach’s race, with a $400,000 TV ad buy, 150,000 mailers, 70,000 phone calls and by knocking on more than 5,000 doors. Mr. Kobach lost.

“When voters — actual people — get an opportunity to shape their election system, it’s unequivocal where they are, but when it’s politicians who are rendering judgment of the system, they are protecting the status quo and engineering outcomes to their advantage,” Faiz Shakir, national political director of the A.C.L.U., said. “The main lesson here is that we should go big and bold on voting rights.”