Albuquerque morning journal., 1910-12-27
Public Forum

tion assembled" to the constitution
soon to be ratified by the people, Is
! that ii lis made very difficult of
amendment by It's provisions" This
| Is not true. Examination Of Article
XIX viii show that amendments may
be proposed az any regular session Of
4 the legislature by two-thirds of the
members thereof, and by a mere ma
jority OF the members once in eight
| years which shall be submitted to the
people at the next general election
and may be ratified by a majority of
those voting thereon, provided that
majority equals or exceeds four-tenths
Of all the votes cast at the election
and In at least ono-half OF the coun-
ties Of the state.
state constitution should possess
some quality Of permanence and sta
bility. and It Is difficult to imagine
how greater liberality with regard to
amendments could be provided with
out throwing the continuance or
amendment of the constitution into
every state election. IL Is very doubt
full whether a mere majority OF one
legislature should at any time, have
power to submit amendments to the
popular vote, II tends too much tor
reduce the constitution to the level
OF ordinary legislation. There are cnly
v ktHt8S III lut hiifpli VI Wiii1ii Aiit ARtT
atitutIGns SO provide, and they are the
only ones where amendments are
more easy OF initiation than here and
In at least two Of them, Arkansas and
Minnesota and in Oklahoma il not
submitted az n special election by
two-thirds vote of the legislature. In
order 10 adopt. "A majority of all vot-
ing at n general election Is required,
while with us forty per cent OF all
voting would be sufficient The six
states are Arkansas, Minnesota, Mis-
souri,, oklahoma, oregon and South
Dakota II is correct to say that In
only three Of these are constitutions
more easily amended than with u.s.
and that in every other state the con-
stitutional difficulties as to amend
ments are greater than in New Mex
leo
Three-fifths OF all members of the
legislature are required to propose |
amendments in Alabama, Florida,
Kentucky, Maryland, Nebraska, North |
Carolina, and Ohio, and two-thirds In |
California. Colorado. Delaware, Geor-
gla Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana,
Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, West |
Virginia, and wyoming, without any |
provision for such action at any time |
by a mere majority These 25 states |
can be classed together on this point, |
as there is so little difference between |
three-fffths and two-thrds.
In Connecticut a majority of the |
lower house may propose amendments |
in one legislature, but two-thirds OF |
each house must take similar action
in the next legislature.
In Massachusetts action Is required |
by d majority of the senate and two
thirds of the lower house In two sue
cessive legislatures, while in Vermont
It must be by two-thirds of the SEN
ate and q majority of the house in
one legislature, and a majority of
each house in the next legislature.
In Tennessee, a majority of one
Legislature ana two-thirds of the next
must act before amendments can pe
submitted
Action by two legislatures, with a
legislative election intervening, Is re-
uuired In Connecticut Delaware, IN
diana, Iowa. Massachusetts, Nevada,
New Jersey, New York, North Dako-
Ia Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South
Carolina. Tennessee (once in six
years) Vermont and Virginia, and
was required in oregon prior to 1909.
In Delaware the amendments are L
not submitted TO the direct vote of the
people, but may be adopted by two
thirds of two successive legislatures
with a legislative election between the
two.
In south Carolina two-thirds of one
may submit amendments
to the people. and, tf ratified by the
voters approval by Il majority OF the
next legislature Is necessary TO ADOPT
In the greater part OF the states
when submitted to the people a ma
iority of those voting on amendments
is sufficient without any such pro-
vision as In New Mexico that that ma
iortv must be at least forty per cent
of the total vote at the election, whicn
still leaves It possible for minority
OF those voting in the election TO
adopt amendments.
In n number OF states, however,
more is required, substantially as fol-
lows
In Arkansas n majority of those
voting at general election: in Con-
a majority of the electors
present; In Illinois, @ majority OF the
electors voting at election OF members
Of the legislature; In Indiana, ma
iority OF the electors. In Minnesota,
a maiority OF all electors voting at a
general election. IN Mississippi ma
iority of the electors voting at an
election; in Nebraska. a majority OF
electors voting at election of legls- {
lature: In North Carolina, a majority
of votes oast at a general election: in !
Ohio. majority Of electors voting at
election of legislature; In oklahoma,
a majority of all electors voting at said l
election. In Rhode Island, three-fifths I
OF electors voting. in Tennessee, ma
Iority OF all voting for representa- \
tives Ia Vermont a majority of the I
votes of the free men. and In Wyo-
ming. a majority OF the electors at n
general election.
Any candid man. who viii examine
.he foregoing condensed Information c
will be forced to admit that In only 1
three states, or. at the most, four. II I
oklahoma be included. can consti-
.utions be more easily amended than
In New Mexico and I'm no other cen
4 constitution be as easily amended 5
rs here.
The wisdom OF having at least our a
forty per cent requirement. less than p
half OF the total vote. win be seen 3
when we reflect upon the notorious d
'act that voters take bat little Interest G
In such questions. I have not figures
10 give on this but I find IN Stimson a
nn constitutions. the statement that II
experience has shown that votes upon 7
amendments are ridic- n
,usly small, and, as an instance. O
NAT ia New York in 1905. an import Il
ant amendment was adopted by a vote 4
hardly one-tcnth Of the vote for gov G
'rnor. Il