HB1222
To Require The Attorney General To Review Ballot Titles For Conflicts With The United States Constitution And Federal Statutes; And To Prohibit The Submission Of Conflicting Initiative Petitions And Referendum Petitions.
AI-Generated Summary
This bill amends Arkansas law concerning initiative and referendum petitions. It requires the Attorney General to review ballot titles and popular names for proposed initiated acts or constitutional amendments. The Attorney General can reject a petition if the ballot title is misleading, if a vote 'for' would effectively be a vote against the voter's perceived viewpoint, or if a vote 'against' would effectively be a vote for a viewpoint the voter is against. Additionally, the Attorney General can reject a petition if its text conflicts with the United States Constitution or federal statutes. Petitioners would then be instructed to redesign the measure and its accompanying titles and names. The bill also prohibits the submission of multiple initiative or referendum petitions that are "conflicting measures." Conflicting measures are defined as petitions covering the same subject matter, for the same general purpose, and containing different language in their full texts, ballot titles, or popular names. Exceptions to this prohibition allow for submission of conflicting measures after the next general election following certification or if the initial measure was rejected. The Attorney General is mandated to reject petitions submitted in violation of this prohibition.
Potential Impact Analysis
Who Might Benefit?
["The primary beneficiaries of this bill would be the state government and potentially the voters, by aiming to ensure clarity and constitutionality in ballot measures. The Attorney General's office would gain explicit authority and a defined process for reviewing petitions for conflicts with federal law and the U.S. Constitution, potentially leading to a more streamlined and legally sound review process. Voters could benefit from clearer ballot titles that accurately reflect the intent of the measure, reducing the likelihood of unintentionally voting for or against a proposition based on misleading language. Citizens seeking to initiate legislation or referenda might also indirectly benefit by being guided towards presenting their proposals in a manner that is more likely to be deemed legally sound and clearly communicated."]
Who Might Suffer?
['Groups seeking to advance initiative and referendum petitions in Arkansas could be negatively impacted by this bill. Petition sponsors, particularly those who may have complex or novel proposals, might face increased hurdles and delays in the review process. The expanded grounds for rejection by the Attorney General, including subjective assessments of misleading ballot titles or potential for voters to misunderstand their vote\'s intent, could make it more challenging to get measures onto the ballot. Furthermore, the prohibition on submitting "conflicting measures" could limit the ability of different groups to present alternative versions of similar proposals concurrently, potentially stifling robust public debate or diverse approaches to legislative change through the initiative and referendum process. The requirement to redesign measures could also incur additional time and financial costs for petitioners.']