Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1962 )

October 22, 1962 Hon. Louis Grump, Chairman Cost of Government Study Committee Austin, Texas Opinion No. W-1459 Re: Whether It would be necessary, if a new constitution were drafted that a full wording of such draht be advertised and published ver- Dear Mr. Crump: batim, and related questions. Your recent requestfor opinion addressed to this of- fice contains the following questions: “a . If a new State Constitution were drafted by a duly authorized constitutional convention would it be necessary for the full wording of this draft to be advertised and published verbatim in newspapers of general circulation in this State, as is currently the case with proposed constitu- tional amendments? “b. If newspaper circulation of this draft constitution is not necessary, are any other methods of advertising, promotion, or publication authorized or required in the Statutes or the present Texas Constitution?” An inspection of the Constitution and statutes reveals that there Is no method provided for a revision of the present Constitution, and also that there Is no constitutional or statu- tory method prescribed for publication of the proposed revision. Section 1 of Article XVII in providing for amending the Constitution states as follows: Wet tfon 1. The Legislature, at any biennial session, by a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each House, to be entered by yeas and nays on the journals, may propose amendments to the Constitution, to be voted upon by the qualified electors for members of the Legislature which pro- posed amendments shall be duly published once a Hon. Louis Grump, page 2 (WW-1459) week for four weeks, commencing at least three months before an election, the time of which shall be specified by the Legislature, in one weekly newspaper of each county, in which such a newspaper may be published; and it shall be the duty of the several returning officers of said election, to open a poll for, and make re- turns to the Secretary of State, of the number of legal votes cast at said. election for and against said amendments; and if more than one be proposed, then the number of votes cast for and against each of them; and if it shall ap- pear from said return, that a majority of the votes cast, have been cast in favor of any amendment, the said amendment so receiving a majority of the votes cast, shall become a part of this Constitution, and proclamation shall be made by the Governor thereof .I’ In deciding whether or not the publication provided for above, for amendments, shall be applicable to the revision of the Constitution, we must construe the word “amendment.” Corpus Juris Secundum makes the following distinction between an amendment and a revision: “Every proposition which effects a change in a constitution, or adds or takes away from it, is an amendment, and remains as such until the author- ity which voted it in shall vote it out, while a revision implies a reexamination and restatement of the constitution, or some part of it, in a corrected or improved form. . . .I’ 16 C.J.S. 37, Constitutional Law, Sec. 7. It is therefore our opinion, and you are so advised, that Arti- cle XVII of our Constitution pertains to amendments only, and not to a revision, and that the method of publication therein described in its unamended form, does not govern the method of publication to be used to accomplish a revision. It follows that there is no procedure in the present Constitution for ad- vertisement or publication of a proposed revision. In response to your second question, we find no pro- visions for advertising, promotion or publication in either the statutes or the Constitution. However, a duly authorized constitutional convention, as representatives of the people, has the authority to provide Hon. Louis Grump, page 3 (bhf-1459) the mode of advertising and publishing a proposed constitutional revision in the absence of constitutional or statutory direc- tives. &ee 16 C.J.S. 29-60 Constitutional Law, ?% 4-5-6-7-8-g- 10. If a new State Constitution were drafted, there is no provision in the present Constitution or stat- utes which provides for publication in newspapers of the proposed revision. Yours very truly, WILL WILSON Attorney General of Texas &k/&4 Fred D. Ward FDW:wb Assistant APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE W. V. Geppert, Chairman L. P. Lollar Sam Stone Tom Peterson REVlXWEDFORTREATTORNEYGENERAL By: Leonard Passmore