Opinion ID: 853063
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Origins of the Ban on Special Legislation

Text: Limits on special legislation are found, in some form or other, in most state constitutions. Osborne M. Reynolds, Local Government Law 85-86 (1982). Their purpose is to prevent state legislatures from granting preferences to some local units or areas within the state, and thus creating an irregular system of laws, lacking state-wide uniformity. Id. at 86. This irregularity is not in itself the only perceived evil. In the view of the proponents of these provisions, if special laws are permitted, the result is perceived to be a situation in which it [becomes] customary for members of the legislature to vote for the local bills of others in return for comparable cooperation from them (a practice often termed `logrolling'). Id. In simple terms, these anti-logrolling provisions are grounded in the view that as long as a law affects only one small area of the state, voters in most areas will be ignorant of and indifferent to it. As a result, many legislators will be tempted, some would say expected, to support the proposals of the legislators from the affected area, even if they deem the proposal to be bad policy that they could not support if it affected their own constituents. [4] In fact, the drafters of the 1851 Indiana Constitution saw one of their principal challenges to be reining in a large and constantly increasing number of special laws. At the Constitutional Debates, John Pettit, of Tippecanoe County, described special legislation as the whole errorthe whole incongruitythe whole oppression of our law, and almost the whole necessity of calling this Convention. 2 Reports of the Debates and Proceedings of the Convention for the Revision of the Constitution of the State of Indiana 1771 (1850). Others complained of the diversion from matters of statewide concern generated by an excessive volume of local legislation. Governor Paris Dunning addressed the General Assembly on this note: Special legislation is a growing evil which has attracted much attention amongst the masses of the people, and to which much well founded opposition exists in the public mind. Indeed, it has for years past engaged full three-fourths of the time of the General Assembly, to the exclusion (from their due consideration) of many other questions of great importance to the people of the State. 1 Charles Kettleborough, Constitution Making in Indiana 195 (Ind. Historical Bureau ed. 1971) (1916). The drafters responded to these concerns by adopting Sections 22 and 23 of Article IV. Article IV, Section 22 prohibits the General Assembly from passing local or special laws to accomplish certain enumerated results, none of which is relevant here. [5] In addition to Section 22's prohibition of special legislation on specified topics, Article IV, Section 23 added a residual demand for general legislation: In all the cases enumerated in the preceding section, and in all other cases where a general law can be made applicable, all laws shall be general, and of uniform operation throughout the State.