clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Constitutional Revision Study Documents of the Constitutional Convention Commission, 1968
Volume 138, Page 72   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

SUFFRAGE AND ELECTIONS

 
 

the question must receive a majority of
the votes cast at the election or it will
fail.
When two questions conflict, the pre-
vailing resolution is that the one receiv-
ing the highest number of affirmative
votes becomes law. In the State of
Washington, when two proposals con-
flict the ballot allows first for the choices
of "either" or "neither." If the majority
of votes cast is for "neither," then both
are defeated. If it is for "either," then
the remaining choices on the ballot de-
termine which measure is to become
effective. The remaining choices allow
the voter to indicate his first preference.
The measure receiving the majority
would be law, provided that the votes it
received were at least one-third of the
total votes cast at that election.
Although the governor's veto power
generally does not extend to measures
adopted by referendum or initiative,
many legislatures can amend or repeal
such measures. Alaska allows the legis-
lature to amend the law at any time,
but to repeal it only when it has run for
two years. The Nevada Constitution is
silent about amendments, but provides
for repeal after three years. Arkansas
and North Dakota provide for amend-
ment or repeal by a two-thirds vote of
the legislature at any time. California
provides that only referred measures
may be amended. In Colorado, Mis-
souri, Montana, Oregon, and Washing-
ton the constitutions state that the ini-
tiative and referendum provisions do
not deprive any member of the legis-
lature of the right to introduce any
measure. This, of course, allows the
members to amend or repeal any act at
any time. Massachusetts allows the
amending and repealing of such meas-
ures, but these legislative acts are sub-
72

ject to the governor's veto and to the
power of referendum. Arizona is the
only state that unconditionally prohibits
measures passed as a result of initiative
or referendum from being amended or
repealed.
Both the initiative and referendum
powers are often declared inapplicable
to certain measures. The most common
restrictions are on bills relating to rev-
enues, appropriations, and courts. The
referendum power does not apply to
emergency measures in more than half
the states with referendum. Generally,
an emergency law is defined as a law
which is necessary for the immediate
preservation of the public peace, health,
or safety. Many states require that an
emergency measure be declared to be
such, either in the preamble of the act
or in a section of it and that it be passed
by a two-thirds vote. Maryland requires
a three-fifths vote. Upon passage, it
will take effect immediately; meaning,
of course, that it will become law as
soon as it is signed by the executive.
Nonemergency measures, in most in-
stances, do not take effect until 90 days
after either the end of the legislative
session or the submission to the gover-
nor. The petition to refer a bill must
be filed within that 90-day period.
Normally, filing a petition to refer an
act passed by the legislature will sus-
pend its operation except when it is an
emergency measure (this is in reference,
of course, to states which do not bar
emergency measures from being so peti-
tioned ) . A second instance in which
filing a petition does not terminate
operation of an act is when the petition
is filed against one item in the bill. Al-
though that item does not take effect,
the remainder of the act is not delayed
in becoming operative.

 

 
clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Constitutional Revision Study Documents of the Constitutional Convention Commission, 1968
Volume 138, Page 72   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  August 16, 2024
Maryland State Archives