Judges: MARK PRYOR, Attorney General
Filed Date: 10/19/1999
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
Mr. Barry Emigh 1720 Arrowhead Rd., Apt. O North Little Rock, AR 72118
Dear Mr. Emigh:
You have requested certification, pursuant to A.C.A. §
PROVIDE ANYONE OR GROUP TO INITIATE AND PETITION PAY TO PLAY GAMES OF CHANCE AND SKILL AS A LOCAL COUNTY MEASURE ON THE REGULAR GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT
AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE ANYONE OR GROUP TO INITATE AND PETITION THE LEGAL VOTERS OF A COUNTY TO ACCEPT OR REFJECT PAY TO PLAY GAMES OF CHANCE AND SKILL AS A LOCAL BALLOT MEASURE ON THE REGULAR GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT:TO PROVIDE THE STATE, AND SUBDIVISIONS THEREOF TO MAKE LAWS, REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES HEREIN NOT INCLUDED: TO PROVIDE FOR THE REPEAL OF PRIOR CONSTITUTIONAL AND STAUTORY PROVISIONS INCONSISTENT WITH THIS AMENDMENT, AND TO PROVIDE SEVERABILITY.
The Attorney General is required, pursuant to A.C.A. §
A.C.A. §
The purpose of my review and certification is to ensure that the popular name and ballot title honestly, intelligibly, and fairly set forth the purpose of the proposed measure. See Arkansas Women's Political Caucus v.Riviere,
The popular name is primarily a useful legislative device. Pafford v.Hall,
The ballot title must include an impartial summary of the proposed measure that will give the voter a fair understanding of the issues presented. Hoban v. Hall,
Having analyzed your proposed measure, as well as your proposed popular name and ballot title under the above precepts, it is my conclusion that I must reject both your proposed popular name and ballot title due to an unresolved ambiguity in the text of your proposed measure. I cannot fairly or completely summarize the effect of your proposed measure to the electorate in a popular name or ballot title without the resolution of this ambiguity. I am therefore unable at this time to substitute and certify a more suitable and correct ballot title under A.C.A. §
The ambiguity to which I refer is contained in Section 2 of your proposed amendment, which provides for state and local rule-making authorities to enact "laws, regulations, and ordinances" necessary for the enforcement of the amendment. The particular statement in that section that is unclear is the following: "[T]hose laws, regulations, or ordinances not herein mentioned shall be reserved to the governing authorities of the state, county, and municipalities respectively." It is entirely unclear what the effect of this statement would be, or what is intended to be accomplished by it. Is it intended to limit the authority granted in the previous sentence? That is, does it refer to "laws, regulations, and ordinances" that relate to the enforcement of the amendment, but which are excepted from the provisions of the previous sentence, or does it refer to those which are unrelated to the amendment? Does it change any previously-existing authority of the various rule-making authorities?
Unless this ambiguity is resolved, I will be unable to summarize your proposed amendment effectively. I recommend that you consult with legal counsel of your choice, or with a person who is skilled in the drafting of legislation.
My office, in the certification of ballot titles and popular names, does not concern itself with the merits, philosophy, or ideology of proposed measures. I have no constitutional role in the shaping or drafting of such measures. My statutory mandate is embodied only in A.C.A. §
My statutory duty, under these circumstances, is to reject your proposed ballot title, stating my reasons therefor, and to instruct you to "redesign" the proposed measure and ballot title. See A.C.A. §
Sincerely,
MARK PRYOR Attorney General
Finn v. McCuen , 303 Ark. 418 ( 1990 )
Bailey v. McCuen , 318 Ark. 277 ( 1994 )
Pafford v. Hall , 217 Ark. 734 ( 1950 )
Gaines v. McCuen , 296 Ark. 513 ( 1988 )
Christian Civic Action Committee v. McCuen , 318 Ark. 241 ( 1994 )
Becker v. McCuen , 303 Ark. 482 ( 1990 )
Hoban v. Hall , 1958 Ark. LEXIS 774 ( 1958 )
Moore v. Hall , 229 Ark. 411 ( 1958 )
Chaney v. Bryant , 259 Ark. 294 ( 1976 )
Becker v. Riviere , 270 Ark. 219 ( 1980 )
Leigh v. Hall , 232 Ark. 558 ( 1960 )
Plugge Ex Rel. Arkansas for Representative Democracy v. ... , 310 Ark. 654 ( 1992 )
Arkansas Women's Political Caucus v. Riviere , 283 Ark. 463 ( 1984 )