Initiated Measure Approval???

guywhofishes

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
28,813
Likes
4,415
Points
958
Location
Faaargo, ND
https://www.legis.nd.gov/assembly/66-2019/documents/19-3041-03000.pdf?
fbclid=IwAR3f01r1dZ6cvvTwmkYqh_y4CY48cZA_aH1jX3EBLZ5cqtPFE_XJ3V85v44


19.3041.03000Sixty-sixthLegislative Assemblyof North DakotaIntroduced bySenators Hogue, Dever, G. LeeRepresentatives K. Koppelman, Louser, Nathe

A concurrent resolution to amend and reenact section 9 of article III of the Constitution of NorthDakota, relating to the process for approving constitutional amendments.

STATEMENT OF INTENTThis measure requires an initiated constitutional measure approved by voters to be approved bythe two subsequent legislative assemblies before becoming effective.BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE OF NORTH DAKOTA, THE HOUSE OFREPRESENTATIVES CONCURRING THEREIN:That the following proposed amendment to section 9 of article III of the Constitution of NorthDakota is agreed to and must be submitted to the qualified electors of North Dakota at thegeneral election to be held in 2020, in accordance with section 16 of article IV of theConstitution of North Dakota.SECTION 1. AMENDMENT. Section 9 of article III of the Constitution of North Dakota isamended and reenacted as follows:

Section 9. A constitutional amendment may be proposed by initiative petition. If signed byelectors equal in number to four percent of the resident population of the state at the last federaldecennial census, the petition for a constitutional amendment may be submitted to thesecretary of state. If electors approve an initiative for a constitutional amendment in a statewideelection, the amendment must be submitted to the two subsequent legislative assemblies. If theinitiative is approved by a majority of members of each house in both legislative assemblies, theinitiative is deemed enacted. All other provisions relating to initiative measures apply toinitiative measures for constitutional amendments.Page No. 1 19.3041.03000

- - - Updated - - -

Would you legal beagles interpret this for me?

Does this not create a roadblock (or significant delay) - basically the legislature can scuttle initiated measures?

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.sayanythingblog.com/ent...moQ2R5ZWA1H-dpKrcat3QMO_uYhq4TC9v8ESdTsPumgOs
 


Meelosh

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2016
Posts
1,302
Likes
12
Points
171
The people of this state have passed some really bad initiated measures recently. That being said, the legislature can eff off with this. A bridge too far.
 

Retired Educator

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2016
Posts
3,234
Likes
196
Points
283
Location
North Dakota
I have mixed emotions on the whole initiated measure process. Completely agree that some initiated measures are very poorly written and then the legislature has to write them to make sure they are legal and enforceable. And they never seem to be in a hurry to complete this process. I also think that it can be a little too easy to bring and initiated measure to the ballot. Also concerns me how uniformed lots of voters are about initiated measures. I guess everyone has the right to become as informed as they wish. Some of us are like the US legislature "Let's pass the AFCA and then figure out what's in it and needs to be fixed."

On the other hand this bill reads to me (nowhere close to a legal authority) that regardless of the vote of the people the legislature will be able to deny the vote according to how they feel. Appears to me that this bill is as poorly written as some of our past initiated measures.
 

eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,730
Likes
709
Points
438
Location
williston
The medical mj initiative proved to everybody you don't want the legislature involved in this shit. Screw them ass wipes
 

Fritz the Cat

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 11, 2015
Posts
5,021
Likes
560
Points
423
The legislature cannot make any changes to the ND Constitution. They do/can place on the ballot clean up items or language that someone noticed needed to be up dated. Only the people can make changes through an initiated measure. Some people glomb onto that like "F" those elected representatives.

The low hurdle is our signature gathering process to get a measure on the ballot. It's an honor system. First providing that individuals have honor. Circulators of a petition can tell potential signatories anything to get them to sign. It is up to the signatory to understand what they are signing even if it is written in Greek.

At a Nebraska fair, people were asked to sign a petition to ban the use of H2O. Amazingly people signed it.
 


guywhofishes

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
28,813
Likes
4,415
Points
958
Location
Faaargo, ND

BrewCrew

★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2016
Posts
458
Likes
2
Points
123
Location
Eastern ND
The time to pay attention to this is again in 2020 - the legislature passed the proposed amendment and it will now be placed on the regular ballot in 2020 for the citizens to either adopt or reject this proposed amendment. As stated earlier the legislature cannot change our constitution - only we the citizens can make those changes.
 


Allen

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
10,587
Likes
1,633
Points
638
Location
Lincoln, kinda...
I think what we need are simply better written initiated measures. Perhaps it would be better if they had some more hurdles and help from the State in the original drafting of an initiated measure.

I don't think even as bad as some of the measures have been, that I could support a proposed change to the Constitution where an initiated measure then has to be acted upon by the State Legislature.
 

Colt45

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2015
Posts
1,041
Likes
144
Points
238
Interesting........ well from what I can tell is they are trying to make it so that the people and the ND house and senate have to approve a change to the ND constitution, which is probably a good thing, I guess I dont see why this wouldnt be a good change
 

Allen

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
10,587
Likes
1,633
Points
638
Location
Lincoln, kinda...
Interesting........ well from what I can tell is they are trying to make it so that the people and the ND house and senate have to approve a change to the ND constitution, which is probably a good thing, I guess I dont see why this wouldnt be a good change

Probably because it gives them a chance to tell the ND voters that approved a constitutional change that they won't implement it. The examples of this are the initiated measures for medical marijuana and the ethics panel. The State legislature is opposed to MM because they are a bunch of old sticks-in-the-mud, and I believe they were also opposed to the latest initiated measure that would put an ethics panel in place to serve as a watchdog over them. So under the proposed constitutional change, they would have simply squelched both measures.
 

Lycanthrope

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 6, 2015
Posts
6,319
Likes
1,336
Points
533
Location
Bismarck
instead of restrictions on IMs, id rather see changes to how they are funded, restricting out of state contributions, etc....
 

Colt45

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2015
Posts
1,041
Likes
144
Points
238
[FONT=&quot]Correct me if I am wrong but when the Legislature wants to amend the constitution they must pass legislation which then must be approved on a statewide ballot. So we the people have a say in changing the ND constitution. But I don't think a check-and-balance exists for constitutional amendments initiated by political committees, which now days are usually out of state billionaires and out of state interests using vague language to fool we the people into voting for something that is not in our best interest. This amendment would change that as I understand it, using the Legislature as the balance. I like it and approve of it.
This does not affect ballot measures which change statute. Medical marijuana was not a constitutional change so all you dopers relax!!!!

The biggest problem we have is voting the same people in over and over and over again and expecting things to change. This is really evident on the national level, we need term limits on US senate and house so bad. That would drain the swamp!


[/FONT]
 


eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,730
Likes
709
Points
438
Location
williston
Yea we need to give them a resounding kiss our ass in 2020. There is going to be a full page of initiated measures on the 2020 ballot it appears
 

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 236
  • This month: 205
  • This month: 92
  • This month: 91
  • This month: 89
  • This month: 83
  • This month: 78
  • This month: 71
  • This month: 66
  • This month: 59
Top Bottom