Opinion ID: 849204
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Majority's Unprecedented Interpretation of Art. 2,  9: A Departure From Decisions In The Gas Tax Cases[9]

Text: The majority asserts that its conclusion, that Act 381 makes appropriations for state institutions, is consistent with an unbroken line of decisions from this Court in the gas tax cases. See maj. op. at 298. Upon close inspection, one finds the assertion untrue. Rather, as will be seen, it is my interpretation, and that of my two dissenting colleagues, that is consistent with the gas tax cases. To be sure, the gas tax cases are unbroken in the sense that all constitute proclamations from this Court that the challenged gas tax was nonreferable, meaning that it could not be subject to a referendum vote. Notwithstanding, they do not support the majority's conclusion. In the earliest gas tax case, this Court stated that the appropriation exception in our constitution was intended to allow the state to exercise its various core functions free from financial embarrassment. See Detroit Automobile Club v. Secretary of State, 230 Mich. 623, 625, 203 N.W. 529 (1925). We explained: It is clear that, by permitting immediate effect to be given to appropriation acts for state institutions, it was their purpose to enable the state to exercise its various functions free from financial embarrassment. The highway department exercises state functions. It was created by the Legislature for that purpose. It must have money to carry on its activities. Without the money appropriated by this act for its immediate use, it would cease to function. The constitutional purpose was to prevent such a contingency. [ Id. at 625-626, 203 N.W. 529 (emphasis added).] [10] This interpretation was reiterated in the second gas tax case. See Moreton v. Secretary of State, 240 Mich. 584, 592, 216 N.W. 450 (1927). Moreton stated that an act that contained appropriations to enable state agencies to function was nonreferable. Detroit Automobile Club and Moreton contain the most thorough discussion of this Court's interpretation of the appropriation exception to the referendum power. [11] These cases demonstrate that the appropriation exception within art. 2,  9, was prompted by a fear of financial embarrassment. That could occur if, by referendum petition, an appropriation for a state institution were suspended pending a vote on a legislative act. See Moreton, supra at 592, 216 N.W. 450; Detroit Automobile Club, supra at 625, 203 N.W. 529. The majority's interpretation of art. 2,  9, impliedly rejects this Court's core function interpretation of the phrase in our constitution exempting from referendum acts making appropriations for state institutions. [12] Therefore, its decision is not consistent with our prior decisions, at all. In fact, it seriously departs from them. Given that Detroit Automobile Club represents the only substantive interpretation by this Court of acts making appropriations for state institutions, I agree with Justice Weaver that we should follow it. Doing so further supports the conclusion I have articulated: art. 2,  9 was intended to exempt from referendum only those acts containing grants that ensure the viability of state agency recipients, or as the Court of Appeals said, that support the agencies' core functions. 246 Mich.App. 82, 630 N.W.2d 376 (2001). This interpretation renders the referendum exception consistent with the fundamental purpose of the general power of referendum. If the appropriation provision in an act is essential to a core purpose of a state institution, the act may not be referred. The risk is too great that the delay caused by a referendum vote would embarrass government and be detrimental to the public. On the other hand, where the appropriation provision is for a lesser function, not essential to the purpose of the department, the embarrassment problem does not arise. In the latter case, the people's right to decide policy issues for themselves, which is the core purpose for which the people reserved the referendum power, should survive.