The Springdale news. [volume] (Springdale, Ark.) 1887-1990, 1916-10-13
RESTORING The
GOVERNMENT To
The PEOPLE
ENDMENT NO. 3OF VITAL IN.
PORTANCE TO EVERY
VOTER.
Will Place the Law-Making Power Of
The State in the Hands OF the Peo-
pie and Restrict the Power Of
the Legislature.

That the people are in favor of an
Initiative and Referendum law is
shown by the decisive vote in favor
of the present law, which was adopted
by vote of 91,367 to 39.111, despite
determined opposition by some strong
influences
However, this law was so drawn
that construction has been placed
upon it by the courts almost oppo-
site that intended by its trainers.
The people who depend upon seeur-
ing needed legislation through the
legislature are frequently dsappoint=
ed, and under the old method of de-
pending wholly upon the legislature
had no way of compelling obedience
TO their demands. Il Is true that if a
representative did not carry out their
instructions they could refuse 10 te
turn him to the legislature. But this
did not give the legislation they want
ed, hence a demand for more direct
legislation through the Initiative and
Referendum, which was intended 10
place the controlling power of the
State where it properly belongS-in
the hands of the people. The pres
ent Initiative and Referendum law,
Of course. was thougn. to be good
but it was the first experience OF
law of this kind in Arkansas and
was much in the way Of an expert
ment and naturally showed defects
tria
in Amendment No 13. and the pres
ent Initiative and Referendum law
are here presented.
The Emergency Clause.
1. The present law provides that
in case Of necessity of immediate
legislation. the legislature may attach
an emergency clause TO measure
which prevents its being referred 10
the people for their approval or re-
lection This would be perfectly
proper in case of real emergency.
but the courts have decided that the
legislature is the sole judge of what
constitutes an emergency, and. there
fore. may attach IL 10 any measure
they please, and which they do not
wish referred TO the people. This
nal intentions of the Initiative and
Referendum Law. The proposed
Amendment No. 13 still gives the leg
islature the power of attaching the
emergency clause, but provides that
II must pass by yea and nay vote of
three-fourths of all the members elect
ed and that the measure shall state
facts which constitute the emergency.
This leaves it possible for the leg
islature to protect the state in case
be no trouble in getting three
fourths vote in favor of a measure II
a genuine emergency existed. The
people are also protected, as it would
be virtually impossible to get three
fourths of the legislature TO endorse
an emergency clause If it did not
really exist.
Amending Initiated Laws.
2 Under the present law a meas
ure adopted by the people can be
amended or changed by the legisla-
ture through the means of an ena-
bling act The Proposed Amendment
No - provides that the legislature
cannot make change except by a
three-fourths vote of its members.
While an unfavorable legislature
might secure a majority vote against
the wishes of the people, ii would be
almost impossible for them to get a
three fourths vote in favor of a
change. Yet if ii should develop that
legislation passed by the people was
really bad, there would be no trouble
in getting it repealed or amended By
a three-fourths vote.
The Power Of the Courts
3. 1t is we'll known that many
times the wishes Of the people have
been defeated by a decision of the
Supreme Court, declaring that a law
was unconstitutional Amendment
No. 13 provides that a measure adopt
ed by the people cannot be declared
unconstitutional by the Supreme
Court except by unanimous decision
bv all its members. This protects
the people and the law. At present
If the Supreme Court is divided only
one Judge is sometimes sufficient to
make a law II it is really plainly
unconstitutional there will be no
doubt but what the court would give
a unanimous decision to that effect.
Challenging Signatures.
q. Under the present law, if there
is any opposition to petitions, OPP
ponents can challenge sufficient
number of the signatures to prevent
its appearing on the ballot although
these signatures may be genuine. But
as the petitioners are scattered all
over the State, it is not only an ex-
pensive process to establish the va
lidity of these signatures, but almost
an impossibility to do, at any cost, in
time to get the measure placed upon
the ballot before election, thus keep