Section I GONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS

1. Constitutions 2. Elections 1 Constitutions

STATE CONSTITUTIONS AND CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION, 1972-1973 BY ALBERT L. STURM*

MENDMENT AND REVISION of State Con­ constitutional conventions and 11 consti­ stitutions continued at a high level tutional commissions. The voters acted on A^ during 1972-73. Compared with the a total of 17 proposals submitted by four previous two biennia, the States placed constitutional conventions in four States: less emphasis on general revision by con­ Montana—a new constitution and three stitutional conventions and constitu­ separate propositions; North Dakota—a tional commissions and more on pro­ new constitution and four alternate posals by their Legislatures. During the propositions; Tennessee—one amend­ 1972-73 biennium, electorates of 46 ment; and Rhode Island—seven amend­ States voted on proposed changes in their ments. Montana was the only State to state constitutions, ranging from minor adopt and make effective a new constitu­ alterations to an entirely new document. tion proposed by a constitutional conven­ In Delaware, where the basic law is tion during the biennium. amended by legislative action without Official action was taken on a total of submission to the voters, the General As­ 530 proposed changes, including 389 of sembly for the second time gave the first statewide applicability in 47 States and of two required approvals to a proposed 141 local amendments in five States. The new constitution.1 The only three States electorates of five States voted on the ques­ that took no action to alter their consti­ tion of calling a constitutional conven­ tutions during the period were: Arkansas, tion and approved three. In Louisiana, which in 1970 had rejected a new consti­ the Legislature called a constitutional tution drafted by a constitutional conven­ convention without submitting the issue tion; Illinois, where a new constitution to the electorate. written by a constitutional convention To facilitate comparison, this analysis became effective in 1971; and Vermont of major constitutional developments where a 10-year time-lock precludes con­ during 1972-73 follows the same general stitutional change at more frequent in­ format in the last two volumes of The tervals. Book of the. States. The five principal Official action to modernize state consti­ parts of the analysis are: first, moderniz­ tutions included the operation of four ing procedure; second, use of the amend­ ing process; third, constitutional commis­ *Dr. Sturm is University Research Professor of Political Science at Virginia Polytechnic Institute sions; fourth, constitutional conventions; and State University. - and, finally, constitutional studies. Elec­ ^In an advisory opinion, the Delaware Supreme tions divisions in offices of the Secretaries Court ruled in 1971 that failure to comply with of State and state legislative service agen­ the constitutional mandate on publication invali­ dated action by the General Assembly for the cies provided most of the data for this second approval. Opinion of the Justices, 275 A. analysis. Salient features of constitutional 2d 558 (I97I). change are presented in tabular form. THE BOOK OF THE STATES proved substantially over the last bien­ MODERNIZING PROCEDURE: USE OF nium but failed to achieve the high point AUTHORIZED METHODS of 1968-69. As always, legislative proposal The four authorized methods of initiat­ was the method used to initiate the vast ing state constitutional change are: pro­ majority of proposed alterations. Use of posal by the Legislature, authorized in all the constitutional initiative more than the States; the constitutional initiative, tripled over the preceding biennium, and available in approximately one third of almost tripled over 1968-69. Although the States; the constitutional convention, proposals by constitutional conventions which may be called in all the States but were almost three times the number for is specifically authorized in four fifths of 1970-71, they numbered only half those state constitutions; and the constitutional in 1968-69. commission, which is expressly authorized The percentage of proposals by both as ah independent organ for proposing^ the constitutional initiative arid constitu­ formal changes only in the Florida consti­ tional epnventions during 1972-73 was tution, but is widely used as an auxiliary more than twice as great as during 197.0- body to assist Legislatures. During the 71; nevertheless, well over nine of every biennium, the first three methods were 10 proposals were initiated by legislative used formally to propose alterations in assemblies during both periods. Legisla­ the basic laws of the States, but constitu­ tive proposals also achieved the highest tional commissions continued to be level of acceptability to the electorate, widely employed by Legislatures to study with a percentage of 71.6. During each the constitution and to submit recom­ of the three biennia shown in Table A, mendations for legislative action. constitutional initiatives won less voter Table A summarizes state constitu­ approval than proposals initiated by tional changes by the three methods of other methods. formal initiation used during 1972-73 and the two preceding biennia. USE OF THE AMENDING PROCESS Included are totals of proposals, adop­ All formal methods of change may be tions, percentages of adoptions, and the. used to propose piecemeal amendments aggregates for all methods. Significantly, to state constitutions but, as noted above, more changes were proposed during proposal by state lawmaking bodies is by 1972-73 than the two preceding biennia. far the most used technique. Submission The increased number of proposals indi­ to the voters of all legislative proposals for cates a continuing high level of interest constitutional change is required in every and concern for modernizing state consti­ State except Delaware, where only legis­ tutions. The percentage of adoptions im­ lative action is necessary. Before consider-

TABLE A STATE CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES BY METHOD OF INITIATION 1968-69, 1970-71, 1972-73

Number of States involved Total proposois Total adopted Percentage ad opted ,, ., A ^, __A Method of 1968-- 1970- 1972- 1968- 1970- 1972- 1968- 1970- 1972- 1968- 1970- 1972- initiation 69 71 73 69 71 73 69 71 73 69 71 7J All methods 44 48 47 490 403 530 372 224 "368 75.9 55.6 69.4 Legislative proposal 41 47 46 450 392 497 340 222 356 75.6 55.6 71.6 Constitutional initiative 5 4 7 6 5 16 0 1 3 0 20.0 18.8 Constitutional convention 5 2 4 34 6 17 32 1 9 94.1 16.7 52.9 CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS ing in detail the number and content of Of the 47 States that took some official proposals initiated by this method, the action to amend or revise their constitu­ use of the constitutional initiative is sum­ tions during 1972-73, Tennessee was the marized; consideration of the role of com­ only one not to use the legislative ap­ missions and conventions in the amend­ proach for some or all proposals. Of the ing process is deferred to later sections. 46 States that used this method, one or Constitutional Initiative Proposals. more proposals initiated by the Legisla­ The constitutional initiative is intended ture were approved by the electorate in 42 to be used to propose amendments when States; all such proposals were rejected by lawmaking bodies fail to act on matters the voters in Kentucky (2), Montana (1), for which there is considerable popular New Hampshire (2), and Rhode Island support. It is not an appropriate method (2). The number of proposed changes for proposing extensive constitutional ranged from one each in three States to 94 change. During 1972-73, 16 constitu­ (24 general and 70 local) proposals in tional initiatives were submitted to the Georgia. The tabulation below lists, with voters in seven States. The numbers pro­ the number of proposals and adoptions, posed and adopted in each State were: the States that used this method to the California (5—1), Colorado (4—1), Michi­ greatest extent during 1972-73. gan (2-0), North Dakota (1-0), Ohio Substantive Changes. Table B classifies (^1-0), Oklahoma (1-0), and Oregon constitutional changes diiring 1972-^73 (2—1). Thus, only three were adopted in and the two preceding bienhia by subject three States, with rejections of all initia­ matter. All proposals are grouped under tive proposals in four States. This tech­ two major categories: first, those of gen­ nique obviously is of relatively minor eral statewide applicability, which in­ importance in the total spectrum of con­ clude all proposed changes in all except stitutional reform and the rate of adop­ five States; and, second, proposed local tions is substantially lower than that for amendments in Alabama (27), Georgia other methods. The most noteworthy use (70), Louisiana (16), Maryland (6), and of the constitutional initiative during South Carolina (22), which affect a single 1972-73 was the Tax and Expenditure political subdivision or a restricted num­ Limitations proposal advocated by Gov­ ber of such units. Proposals of general ernor Ronald Reagan of California and statewide applicability are further classi­ rejected by the voters at the November 6, fied under subject matter headings that 1973, referendum. conform broadly to the principal subject Legislative Proposals. Table A shows matter areas of state constitutions. The approximately 14 percent increase in the last group includes proposals for general number of legislative proposals during constitutional revision. The percentage of 1972-73 over those of 1970-71, and 10 adoptions of proposals of statewide ap­ percent increase over 1968-69. Not only plicability improved very substantially in do these figures indicate sustained atten­ 1972-73 compared with 1970-71, increas­ tion to constitutional modernization, but ing from 58.2 to 70.7 percent. also the concern of state lawmaking Table B indicates that by far the largest bodies for this subject. Legislative pro­ number of proposed changes during each posals varied from minor matters of local of the three biennia was in the area of concern to entire new articles and major state and local finance, including taxa­ sections of the constitutional system. tion, debt; and financial administration.

State Proposals Adoptions Georgia 24 general, 70 local 22 general, 54 local Louisiana 26 general, 16 local 6 general, 0 local Alabama 12 general, 27 local 2 general; 7 local Nebraska 34 general 30 general South Carolina 10 general, 22 local 10 general, 17 local Texas 23 general 17 general THE BOOK OF THE STATES TABLE B SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES IN STATE CONSTITUTIONS PROPOSED AND ADOPTED 1968-69, 1970-71, 1972-73

Total Total Percentage Subject matter proposed adopted adopted 1968-69 1970-71 1972-73 1968-69 1970-71 1972-73' 1968-69 1970-71 1972-73 Proposals of statewide applicability 305 300 389 220 176 275 72.1 58.2 70.7 Bill of Rights 10 13 26 9 11 22 90.0 84.6 84.6 Suffrage and elections 16 39 34 10 23 24 62.5 59.0 70.6 Legislative branch 68 42 46 52 19 25 76.5 45.2 54.3 Executive branch .31 27 36 25 22 25 80.6 81.5 69.4 Judicial branch 28 17 35 22 11 26 78.5 64.7 74.3 Local government 18 21 • 30 14 15 23 77.7 71.4 76.7 Taxation and finance 58 50 85 34 29 56 58.6 58.0 65.9 State and local debt 24 25 24 14 10 15 58.3 40.0 62.5 State functions 40 46 40 34 26 36 85.0 56.5 90.0 Amendment and revision 8 13 19 5 7 12 62.5 53.8 63.1 General revision proposals 4 7 2 1 3 1 25.0 42.9 50.0 Miscellaneous provisions — — 12 — — 10 — — 83.3 Local amendments 185 103 141 152 48 93 82.2 46.6 65.9

The figures for 1972-73 show a major in­ maintained the lowest percentage of crease in financial proposals. As in the adoptions during all three periods. Pro­ two preceding biennia, the percentage of posals for change in legislative articles adoptions remained among the lowest of rejected by the voters related mainly to all categories, although it improved dur­ compensation of legislators and annual ing 1972-73. Generally, the voters tended sessions. Most changes in legislative ap­ to show greatest resistance to local debt portionment, powers, and procedure were proposals; in contrast, they usually ap­ approved. Provisions for four-year terms, proved measures for tax exemptions (es­ joint election of the Governor and Lieu­ pecially those applicable to low-income tenant Governor, succession, procedure elderly and veterans) and veterans' for determining disability, and altera­ bonuses. tions in administrative organization were The same rank order of proposals for ''major changes in the executive branch constitutional change in the three adopted by the voters. Most approved branches of government occurred during alterations in judicial articles related to 1972-73 as in the two preceding biennia. establishment of judicial qualifications The legislative branch led in the number commissions, selection of judges, judicial of proposals, followed by the executive organization, procedure, and jurisdiction. and the judiciary. In percentage of adop­ Proposed additions and modifications tions, the judicial branch led the others in state bills of rights maintained their during 1972-73, replacing the executive high ranking in percentage of adoptions branch which had exceeded both the although they doubled in number; dur­ others in rate of adoptions the two pre­ ing 1972-73, they were surpassed only by ceding biennia. The legislative branch amendments relating to state functions. CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS Addition of sex to antidiscrimination constitutional commissions to constitu­ guarantees was approved in seven of eight tional conventions as organs for initiating States in which it was proposed. Modifica­ major alterations in the organic law be­ tions in the jury system were the principal cause they have more control over com­ changes made in procedural guarantees. missions. Except for Florida, where the As in 1970-71, the voters adopted almost new constitution provides for periodic three fourths of all proposed changes in establishment of a constitutional cominis- suffrage and elections articles, which in­ sion with independent power to initiate cluded voting rights and liberalization and propose unlimited changes, these of residency and voting requirements. bodies serve mainly as auxiliary staff arms Voters in at least five States rejected pro­ of legislative assemblies. Lawmakers may posals for reduction of the voting age to usually accept, modify, or reject in whole 18, although nationwide extension of the or in part the recommendations of consti­ elective franchise to 18-year-olds was man­ tutional commissions. dated by the Twenty-sixth Amendment to Usage. Table 1 on page 16 sum­ the Constitution adopted in June 1971. marizes salient features of the 11 constitu­ The 76,7 percent of adoption of local tional commissions operative in 11 States government proposals again was high in during the biennium ending December comparison with other categories. Home 31, 1973. Nine of the 11 commissions were rule, structural changes, and intergoveni:- created before 1972. Only the New Hamp­ mental cooperation were the principal shire and Texas bodies were established subjects of local government proposals during the period of this analysis, both in during 1972-73. State functions registered 1973. Thus, most of the constitutional the highest percentage of adoptions of commissions during the last two years all areas with 90 percent. This can be were active also in previous biennia and attributed largely to the voters' approval have been reported in previous volumes of all proposals for education (excluding of The Book of the States. Six of the 11 educational finance) and conservation commissions completed their work and and environmental protection. Also with submitted final reports before the end of a high rate of approval were proposals for 1973: the Indiana, Louisiana, and Mon­ lotteries (9 of 10) and changes in health tana bodies in 1972; and the Alabama, and welfare articles (4 of 5). Generally, California, and Minnesota comrhissions proposed changes in amendment and re­ in 1973. The New Hampshire and Texas vision articles liberalized the procedure commissions, both of which were given for altering the States' organic laws. Al­ study responsibilities, in preparation for though there are major exceptions, par­ constitutional conventions, were to re­ ticularly in those States that authorize main operative during the conventions in local amendments, the general trend in these States which convene in 1974.>ynder constitutional amendment and revision their basic acts, the final reports of the continues to provide increased flexibility South Dakota and Utah commissions are in government, liberalize substantive and due in 1975, and of the Ohio Constitu­ procedural rights, broaden popular con­ tional Revision Commission in 1979. trol, reduce restrictions on governmental General Features. Nine of the 11 consti­ action, and generally strengthen the struc­ tutional commissions were created by tural foundations of state government. statutory law; the California and Indiana bodies were established by legislative CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS resolution. With reference to the primary The? popularity of constitutional com­ purpose of their creation, constitutional missions continued during 1972-73, al­ commissions generally are classified in though the number of such bodies oper­ two major categories—study and prepara­ ating in this period diminished. A tory bodies, the former comprising the slackening in the pace of state constitu­ larger group. The primary duty of pre­ tional modernization was to be expected paratory commissions is to make prepara­ after the relatively extensive action of the tions for a constitutional convention. last decade. Legislators generally prefer Among the 11 commissions operative 8 THE BOOK OF THE STATES during 1972-73, only the Montana Con­ earlier commissions. Typically, the ap­ stitutional Convention Commission had pointing authorities include presiding specifically assigned duties to make actual officers of the two legislative houses, the preparations for holding a convention. Governor, and the Chief Justice of the The Ohio Constitutional Revision Com­ Supreme Court. The Louisiana Constitu­ mission had duties potentially prepara­ tional Revision Commission, which was tory in its mandate to submit recom­ not typical, included 30 legislators and 18 mendations to a convention if called; members appointed by designated organi­ however, the voters defeated a convention zations. Some commissions, exemplified call in November 1972. Both the New by the Montana Commission, were re­ Hampshire and Texas commissions were quired to be bipartisan. required to study the constitution and to All constitutional commissions opera­ prepare and submit recommendations for tive during the last biennium were use by constitutional conventions in 1974. financed by public funds, most by direct Study commissions typically are man­ appropriations. The California Constitu­ dated to study the constitution, deter­ tion Revision Commission received its mine what changes are needed, and sub­ financial support from allocations made mit recommendations—usually to the to the Joint Committee on Legislative Legislature and often to the Governor Organization, and the Indiana commis­ and to a constitutional convention if sion from Legislative Council funds. As called. Most constitutional commissions previously noted, both of these bodies active during 1972-73 reported to the were created by legislative resolution Legislature. Practically all mandates in­ rather than statute. Total appropriations cluded study of the constitution and sub­ through the current fiscal year to the mission of recommendations, but some other nine commissions operative during (Extended furtHer. The Alabama Coiisti- 1972-73 ranged from |900,000 appropri­ tutibnal Commission, for example, was ated to the Texas body down to $10,000 ^ required also to recommend apipropriate for the New Hampshire commission. Al­ procedure for submission and adoption though no total figures are available for of proposals. The Minnesota Constitu­ the California commission, its expendi­ tional Study Commission, in addition to tures over the 10 years of its existence proposing substantive changes, was re­ certainly exceeded those of any other such quired to recommend "a revised format body operative during the period. Aver­ for a new Minnesota constitution as may age total funding through the current appear necessary, in preparation for a fiscal year of the nine commissions that constitutional convention if called or as a received direct legislative appropriations basis for making further amendments to was $269,159; the median was $162,084, the present constitution/'^ Thus, com­ expended by the Montana commission. mission mandates as well as the purposes These figures are more than twice as high of creation vary. as those for the preceding biennium, The members of constitutional com­ which were: average, $96,587; median, missions are designated in two ways: ex between $75,000 and $80,000. officio and by appointment. Appointive The period of active operation of the members far outnumber ex officio de­ 11 commissions, as of December 31, 1973, signees on practically all commissions. varied from the protracted 10-year dura­ Five of the commissions operative during tion of the California commission to the 1972-73 had ex officio members. The size four months of active existence of the of these bodies ranged from a maximum New Hampshire comniission. The aver­ of 80 on the California commission down age effective life of the 11 commissions to 10 on the New Hampshire body. The through 1973 was approximately 40 median size of the 11 commissions was 25, months including California, or 32 which is somewhat larger than most months excluding California; the median was 42 months. The commissions in Ohio, 'Minnesota Sess. Laws 1971, Regular Session, c. South Dakota, and Utah were operative 806. sec. 3, subd. 2. during all of 1972-^73; the active existence CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS of six constitutional commissions, includ­ State that initiated constitutional revision ing these and the Alabama, New Hamp­ by stages during the late 1960s, adopted shire and Texas bodies, continued beyond seven major, proposals at the November this biennium. 1972 general election and extended the Reports and Recommendations: At authorized period for completing general least seven of the 11 commissions had revision through 1974. made their final reports and completed South Dakota made major progress or discontinued their work by the end of toward a modernized constitution when the biennium. The California body had the voters adopted four new articles in submitted its final report in 1971; other November 1972. In its final report, the comprehensive final reports were made Minnesota commission recommended during 1972-73 by the Alabama, Min­ that the constitution be "revised by a nesota, and Texas commissions. The Ala­ series of comprehensive amendments to bama and Texas reports included pro­ be submitted in a phased and orderly posed new or revised constitutions with manner over the next few elections" and, extensive commentary, as had the earlier further, that the Legislature create an­ California report. The proposed new other commission "to continue an in- Texas constitution was prepared as a set depth study of Minnesota's Constitution of recommendations to the Legislature and recommend further revisions to which would assemble as a constitutional future legislatures."* Progress toward convention in January 1974. The Min­ constitutional revision in other States nesota report recommended updating the with commissions operative during 1972- constitution by amendments, a revised 73 was made more by, piecemeal amend­ constitutional format, and creation of an­ ments than by phased revision procedure. other study commission. Proposed re­ visions in the form of amendments were CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS submitted to legislative assemblies by Constitutional conventions have been other commissions except those estab­ used traditionally for extensive revision lished primarily as preparatory bodies. of an old constitution or writing a new Phased Revision. Some commissions one in American States. Indigenous to during 1972-73 played major roles in pro­ the United States, at least 226 such bodies grams of phased revision, which involves have been convened in the 50 States constitutional modernization by a series through 1973.'' In recent decades conven­ of steps, each covering a substantial part tions have been assembled increasingly to of the constitution. Although the re­ propose more limited alternatives in the sponsibility for formal initiation and sub­ form of one or more amendments when mission to the voters rests with the other methods were unauthorized or in­ Legislature, constitutional commissions expedient. Judicial interpretation and prepared draft proposals in all States that practice have sanctioned the use of consti­ are revising their constitutions by stages. tutional conventions in all States, but Among the States that elected to follow their use is expressly authorized in only this procedure during 1972-73 were 39 state constitutions. Indiana, Minnesota, Ohio, and South Usage. Table 2 on page 19 provides Dakota. California was a leading example general information on the four constitu­ of phased revision during the late 1960s tional conventions that were in session and early 1970s. The third and final during the biennium ending December phase proposals for revision recom­ 31, 1973. The Montana and North mended by the California commission Dakota conventions were unlimited with were submitted to the electorate in No­ ^Minnesota Constitutional Study Commission, vember 1972.^ South Carolina, another:- Final iJeport, February. 1973, p. i. "See, generally, Albert L. Sturm, Thirty Years 'See The Book of the States, 1972-1973, Volume of State Constitution-Making, 1938-1968 (New' XIX, p. 10; and Albert L. Sturm, Trends in State York: National Municipal League, 1970), Ch. 4, Constitution-Making, 1966-1972 (Lexington, Ky.: the Epilogue, and Appendix C; and by the same The Council of State Governments, 1973), pp. author. Trends in State Constitution-Making, 39-40. 1966-1972, pp. 17-27, and Appendix B. 10 THE BOOK OF THE STATES no restriction on their power to propose Salient features of the proposed new revisions; the mandate to the Louisiana constitution included: added protection and Rhode Island bodies imposed stated for individuals against discrimination limitations on their action. The conven- and unreasonable invasion of privacy; , tions in Montana and North Dakota met right to sue the State for injury to person initially and did part of their work before and property; provision for a healthful January 1972; both adjourned and their environment; reduction of the age of proposals were submitted to the voters in majority to 18; retention of four-year 1972. Both the Montana and North terms for senators and two-year terms for Dakota conventions submitted new con­ House members to be elected from single- stitutions to the voters, who approved the member districts; reapportionment by a Montana document but rejected the special five-member commission to which North Dakota instrument. The limited the Legislature may submit recommenda­ Rhode Island convention was approved tions; requirement that sessions of the by the voters, its delegates elected, its Legislature and its committees be public; work completed, and its proposals sub­ convocation of special sessions either by mitted to the electorate within four the Governor or a majority of legislators; months during the latter part of 1973. constitutional elective status for six exec­ Five of seven amendments proposed by utive officers; joint election of the Gov­ the Rhode Island convention were ap­ ernor and Lieutenant Governor with re­ proved. The Louisiana body, which was duction of age qualification of these called by the Legislature and assembled officers from 30 to 25; limitation of the initially early in January 1973, was man­ number of principal executive depart­ dated to complete its work by January 19, ments to 20; removal of the duty of the 1974. The single amendment proposed by Lieutenant Governor to preside over the the Tennessee limited convention in 1971 Senate; amendatory veto power for the was adopted by the electorate on August Governor and elimination of the pocket 3, 1972. Salient features of the four con- veto; procedure for determining guberna­ yentiphs operative during 1972-73 are torial disability; retention of the three- summarized in the following paragraphs; tiered court system; election of judges on more information on the early phases and a nonpartisan basis; a two-year increase developments of the Montana and North in the terms of all judges; and creation of Dakota bodies is provided in the last a Judicial Standards Commission. volume (XIX) of The Book of the States. Other major features of the new Mon­ Montana. Montana's fourth constitu­ tana document were: abandonment of tional convention, which met for three percentage limits on state and local debt; days to organize, November 29-December determination of state and local debt 1, 1971, reconvened on January 17, 1972, limits by the Legislature; provisipn for and adjourned sine die the following equalized state valuation of property for March 24.^ The 100 delegates, who were tax purposes; modification of the anti- elected from 23 House of Representatives diversion provision for highway-derived districts in the same manner as legislators revenues; a new article on environment on a partisan basis, approved a proposed and natural resources; broadened pro­ new constitution and three additional tection against discrimination in educa­ alternative propositions on controversial tion; creation of separate boards for pub­ issues to be voted on separately. Approved lic education and higher education; by 90 delegates without a dissenting vote extended local home rule powers; broad­ and signed by all 100 delegates, the new ened authority for local intergovern­ 11,200-word constitution was about one mental cooperation; transfer of responsi­ half the length of the existing law. bility for welfare assistance from the counties to the State; mandates to the 'For more detailed information on the authori­ zation, membership, organization, staffing, and Legislature to create a salary commission other early developments of the convention, see and an office of consumer counsel, and The Book of the States, 1972-1973, XIX, pp. 13- draw up a code of ethics; provision for the 14. constitutional initiative and removal of CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS 11 the limit on the number of proposed con­ North Dakota. Plenary sessions of the stitutional amendments on any one bal­ unlimited North Dakota constitutional lot; and mandatory submission of the convention, which had held a three-day question of calling a constitutional con­ organization meeting April 6-8, 1971, be­ vention to the voters at least every 20 gan on January 3, 1972.^ Under a man­ years. The three alternative propositions date to remain in session no more than 30 to be voted on separately were: first, a natural days with authority to recess for a unicameral or bicameral Legislature; maximum of 10 natural days, the conven­ second, for or against allowing the people tion adjourned sine die on February 17, or the Legislature to authorize gambling; 1972. The delegates, who had been and, third, for or against the death pen­ elected November 3, 1970, on a nonparti­ alty. san basis from the same districts as mem­ The Montana convention, which had bers of the House of Representatives, ap­ an appropriation of $499,281, set aside proved a new constitution by a vote of funds for an educational campaign by a 91 to 4 with 3 absent and not voting. Also 19-member committee to be conducted approved for submission to the voters during the interim between adjournment were four alternate propositions: a bi­ and the referendum. The propriety of cameral or unicameral Legislature; this action was challenged. The Montana increase in the number of signatures re­ Supreme Court enjoined it, holding that quired for use of the referendum and in­ the convention could not delegate its itiative (both statutory and constitu­ authority to a committee of its own mem­ tional); reduction of the age of majority bers that would function after sine die to 18; and repeal of the prohibition adjournment.'^ The delegates used private against legislative authorization of lot- funds to finance the adoption campaign. ,teries. The proposed constitution and three Among the salient features of the pro­ alternative propositions were submitted posed new constitution, which contained to the electorate at a special election approximately 9,000 words, were the fol­ June 6, 1972. The constitution was ap­ lowing: a new antidiscrimination guaran­ proved by a margin of 116,415 to 113,883; tee applicable to public accommodations; the voters also approved a bicameral right to sue the government and to keep Legislature, endorsed legalization of and bear arms; right of candidates for gambling, and retention of the death public office to a fair election; prohibition penalty. The validity of the Governor's against imposition of the death penalty; proclamation that the constitution had reduction of residency requirements for been adopted was challenged shortly voting; reduction of the age qualifica­ thereafter. On August 18, 1972, the Mon­ tions for all electiye state offices to 21; tana Supreme Court by a 3-to-2 majority and removal of congressmen and judges ruled that the 1972 constitution had been froni eligibility for recall and reduction approved by the required majority and of the signature requirement for recall. that the Governor's proclamation was cor- Major provisions relating to the three rect.s The new constitution became effec­ branches of government were: creation of tive July 1, 1973, except as otherwise pro­ a five-member, nonlegislative Reappor­ vided in the transition schedule. tionment Commission if the bicameral ''Montana ex rel. Kvaalen v. Graybill et al., 496 Legislature were opted; increased terms P. 2d 1127 (1972). of House members from two to four years; *The court held that the words in Article XIX, authoirization for the Legislative Assem­ Section 8 of the existing Montana constitution bly to meet any 80 days during a "approval by a majority of electors voting at the election" meant approval by a majority of the biennium; prohibition against closed leg­ total number of electors casting valid ballots on islative and committee sessions; appoint­ the question of approval or rejection of the pro­ ment of an Auditor General by the Legis­ posed constitution, and that the provision did not lative Assembly; reduction of the number refer to or include those electors who failed to express an opinion on the issue. Montana ex rel. Cashmore and Burger v. Anderson, Governor, 500 'For a summary of earlier developments, see P. 2d 921 (1972). The Book of the States, 1972-1973, XIX, p. 14. 12 THE BOOK OF THE STATES of elective officers from 14 to seven and Republicans, and three Independents. joint election of the Governor and Lieu­ The delegates elected a retired Supreme tenant Governor; removal of the Lieu­ Court Justice as chairman, three vice tenant Governor as presiding officer of the chairmen, and a secretary. They approved Senate; mandatory consolidation of state appointments to substantive committees executive agencies into a maximum of 15 for each of the four subject areas autho­ departments; gubernatorial power to rized in the enabling legislation and to propose reorganizations subject to legis­ operational or procedural committees on lative disallowance; the reduction veto; rules and credentials, resolutions, admin­ creation of a state planning council; de­ istration, public information, and style letion of reference to lower courts by pro­ arid drafting. Limited by an appropria­ vision only for the Supreme Court and tion of only $20,000, the staflE was neces­ district courts; a unified system of courts; sarily small. The administrative staff gubernatorial appointment of judges to consisted of an executive director and fill judicial vacancies from nominees by a four part-time secretaries, and the re­ Judicial Nominating Commission, but re­ search staff included a research director, tention of nonpartisan election of judges; an assistant director, and six research and promulgation of procedural rules by assistants. Delegates received no compen­ the Supreme Court. sation. Other significant provisions included: The enabling act limited the authority authorization for the Legislature to incur of the convention to proposing amend­ state debt by a three-fifths vote; extended ments on four specific subjects: election home rule power for counties and cities; reform, repeal of the prohibition against provision for nine-member state boards of lotteries, compensation of members of the public education and higher education, General Assembly, and functions of the the former to designate the chief state grand jury in the judicial system. The education officer; right to a healthful en­ convention approved seven proposed vironment with access to the courts to en­ amendments for submission to the elec­ force it; mandatory legislative creation of torate on November 6, 1973. The voters the office of ombudsman; and mandatory approved five and rejected two. submission of the question of calling a The five amendments approved con­ constitutional convention to the elector­ tained the following provisions: authori­ ate at least once every 30 years. zation for state lotteries; modification of The referendum on the proposed new suffrage and election provisions, includ­ constitution and the four alternate propo­ ing requirement of disclosure of election sitions was held April 28, 1972. The campaign expenditures by candidates for voters rejected the proposed document by top state offices; restriction on the holding a vote of 64,312 to 107,249, which nulli­ of any civil office to qualified electors; fied the effectiveness of the vote on the authorization for use of the information four propositions. in bringing all felony cases to trial except Rhode Island. In striking contrast with those involving capital offenses; and re­ the sixth Rhode Island constitutional quirement of popular referendum on the convention, which was in existence of­ convention question at least once every ficially from December 1964 to February 10 years. The voters rejected proposals to 1969, the seventh convention convened increase the terms of chief state officers, September 4,1973, and adjourned sine die including the Governor, from two to four a month later. At the referendum on the years, and to repeal the constitutional question of calling a convention August limit on legislative pay of $5 a day for 60 7, 1973, the voters gave their approval days and substitute a salary of $2,000 a grudgingly-the vote was 21,302 to 21,210. year, subject to change by the General At the same election, 100 delegates to the Assembly with the voters' approval. convention were elected on a partisan Louisiana. Second of the limited con­ basis, two from each of the 50 state sena­ ventions operative during 1972-73 was torial districts. The partisan breakdown the eleventh constitutional convention of of the membership was 54 Democrats, 43 Louisiana, which was called by the Legis- CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS 13 lature without referring the question of a Other Convention Calls. In addition to call to the people. Governor Edwin Ed­ Rhode Island, four other States voted on wards, who had provided key leadership the question of calling a constitutional in gaining legislative support for the con­ convention during the 1972-73 biennium, vention, signed the enabling act on'May all at the general election in 1972. The 26, 1972. The act provided for two groups voters of Alaska, by a vote of 29,192 to of delegates for a total of 132: 105 were 55,339, rejected a call at the second refer­ elected August 19, 1972, from districts of endum on this issue after the Alaska Su­ the House of Representatives on a non­ preme Court ruled that the electorate's partisan basis; the remaining 27 included approval for a convention in 1970 was 12 appointed to represent specified in­ invalid.ii At a referendum on the ques­ terest groups by the Governor, who also tion, which is required at least once every appointed the remaining 15 from the 20 years, Ohio voters also rejected an un­ public at large. limited convention call by 1,291,277 to The convention met initially on Janu­ 2,142,534. New Hampshire and Texas ary 5, 1973, and was in session nine days approved calls: the vote in New Hamp­ during January to organize and adopt shire was 96,793 to 73,365; in Texas, rules. Officers elected by the delegates in­ 1,549,982 to 985,282. cluded the chairman, who was Speaker of The New Hampshire enabling act set the House of Representatives, a first vice May 8, 1974, as th^ date for convening chairman, three vice chairmen, a secre­ the unlimited convention and appropri­ tary, and a treasurer. Three types of com­ ated $180,000 to fund it. To study the mittees were established: eight substan­ constitution in preparation for the 1974 tive, four procedural, and four steering convention, the New Hampshire Legis­ committees.i*' The enabling act (Act 2 of lature created a 10-member commission 1972) designated 34 staff members for the and appropriated $10,000 for its expenses. convention, including four research In, Texas, where the constitution has no supervisors from the State's four law provision for a constitutional convention, schools, six members of the House of the electorate approved a constitutional Representatives, five state Senators, four amendment providing that the members members of the Louisiana State Law of the Legislature convene as a constitu­ Institute, 14 research assistants, and a di­ tional convention on January 8, 1974.12 rector of research. Appropriations for Authority of the convention was limited the convention totaled $2,940,000, and only by the requirement that the bill of compensation of delegates was set at $50 rights of the present constitution be re­ per diem. tained in full. The amendment fiirther During the five months between the provides that: members of the convention organization meetings in January and the shall receive compensation as determined reconvening of the convention, the sub­ by a five-member committee of desig­ stantive committees and staff assembled nated state officers headed by the Gover­ information, held hearings, and prepared nor; the convention may by a vote of^at proposals for consideration by the whole least two thirds of its members submit to convention. The delegates reconvened in the voters a new constitution which may plenary session on July 5, and the en­ contain alternate articles or sections, or abling act required the convention to revisions of the existing constitution complete its work by January 19, 1974. which also may contain alternative pro­ Within 30 days after submission of the visions; and that the convention be auto­ proposed draft of a new constitution, the matically dissolved on May 31, 1974, un- Governor was mandated to call an elec­ tion to submit it to the electorate. ^The Court sustained the contention of chal­ lengers that many voters had been misled by the ^Tor more detailed information on the organi­ wording of the question on the ballot into be­ zation and membership of the convention, see the lieving that a convention was required by the Citizen's Guide to the 1973 Constitutional Con­ constitution and that they had no alternative to vention (Baton Rouge, La.; Public Affairs Re­ approval. Boucher v. Bomhoff, 495 P. 2d 77 (1972). search Council of Louisiana, April 1973) . "Article XVII, Section 2, Constitution of Texas. 14 THE BOOK OF THE STATES less extended for a maximum period of are volumes on the Alaska and Illinois 60 days by a two-thirds vote. The amend­ conventions. ment also required the Texas Legislature Especially noteworthy is the projected to create a Constitutional Revision Com­ 10-volume collection. Sources and Docu­ mission to study the need for constitu­ ments of United States Constitutions, tional change and report recommenda­ edited and annotated by William F. tions to the Legislature not later than Swindler, Professor of Law, College of November 1, 1973. Supported by a $900,- William and Mary, and published by 000 appropriation, the 37-member com­ Oceana Publications. The new collection mission fulfilled this mandate, presenting contains annotations of significant sec­ to the Legislature a proposed new consti­ tions of each document, historical back­ tution with extensive commentary.^? ground notes on colonial or territorial de­ velopment, analytical tables tracing the CONSTITUTIONAL STUDIES emergence of specific provisions in suc­ Constitutional conventions and com­ cessive constitutions, a selected bibliogra­ missions established during 1972-73 phy, and a separate index for each State. brought new useful additions to the grow­ The first volume of the collection, cov­ ing volume of literature on constitution- ering Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkan­ making in American States. As in pre­ sas and California, was published in 1973. ceding biennia, reports and analyses pre­ pared for constitutional conventions by constitutional commissions, other ad hoc SELECTED REFERENCES bodies, ,and existing organizations con­ Bard, Dean F., ed. Debates of the North Dakota Constitutional Convention of 1972. 2 vols. Bis­ tained much data not only of use to per­ marck, N.D.: Quality" Printing Service, 1972. sons directly involved in constitution Braden, George D. Citizens' Guide to the Texas making, but also of general public in­ Constitution. Austin, Tex.: Texas Advisory terest. Besides studies prepared for con­ Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, ventions and other organs actually en­ 1972. Constitutions of the United States: National and gaged in modernizing constitutions, other State. 2 vols. Dobbs Ferry, N.Y.: Oceana Publi­ publications during the biennium in­ cations, 1962. Loose leaf. cluded special studies of the work and Dishman, Robert B. State Constitutions: The proceedings of past conventions, addi­ Shape of the Document. Rev. ed. New York: tions to existing constitutional series, and National Municipal League, 1968. Edwards, William A., ed. Index Digest of State a documentary collection of state consti­ Constitutions. Dobbs Ferry, N.Y.: Oceana Pub­ tutional materials. lications, 1959. Prepared by the Legislative Re­ The records of proceedings and debates search Fund, Columbia University. of at least two constitutional conventions Grad, Frank P. The State Constitution: Its Func­ tion and Form for Our Time. New York: Na­ were published during the biennium— tional Municipal League, 1968. Reprinted from Illinois, in seven volumes, and North Da­ Virginia Law Review, vol. 54, no. 5 Qune 1968). kota, in two volumes. Grad, Frank P. "The Drafting of State Constitu­ Scheduled for publication in 1974 by tions: Working Papers for a Manual." New the University Press of Virginia is a two- York: National Municipal League, 1967. Graves, W. Brooke, ed. Major Problems in State volume work. Commentaries on the Con­ Constitutional Revision. Chicago: Public Ad­ stitution of Virginia, by A. E. Dick How­ ministration Service, 1960. ard, Professor of Law at the School of Graves, W. Brooke. "State Constitutional Law: A Law, University of Virginia. Twenty-Five Year Summary," William and The National Municipal League con­ Mary Law Review, vol. 8, no. 1 (Fall 1966), 1- 47. tinued publication of its state-by-state May, Janice C. Amending the Texas Constitution: series of studies dealing with state consti­ 1951-1972. Austin, Tex.: Texas Advisory Com­ tutional conventions held since World mission on Intergovernmental Relations, 1972. War II. Scheduled for publication in 1974 Model State Constitution. 6th ed. New York: Na­ tional Municipal League, 1963. Revised 1968. Newman, Louis E., ed. Focus on CC-73, Discussion ^^exas Constitutional Revision Commission, A Series, April-July, 1973. Baton Rouge, La.: In­ New Constitution for Texas: Text, Explanation, stitute of Government, Louisiana State Univer­ Commentary (Austin, Texas: November 1973). sity, 1973. CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS 15 Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana. Convention's Response to the Urban Crisis. Citizens' Guide to the 1973 Constitutional Con­ 1972. vention. Baton Rouge, La.: Public Affairs Re­ State Constitution Studies. 10 vols, in two series. search Council, April 1973. New York: National Municipal League, 1960- Record of Proceedings: Sixth Illinois Constitu­ 1965. tional Convention, December 8, 1968-Septem- Studies in Illinois Constitution Making. Urbana, ber 3, 1970. 7 vols. Springfield, 111.: July 1972. 111.: University of Illinois Press, 1972—. Published by the Secretary of State in coopera­ No. 1. Elitner Gertz. For the First Hours of tion with the Sixth Illinois Constitutional Con­ Tomorrow: The New Illinois Bill of vention. Rights. 1972. State Constitutional Convention Studies. New No. 2. Janet Cornelius. Constitution Making York: National Municipal League, 1969—. in Illinois, 1818-1970. 1972. Number One—Elmer E. Cornwell, Jr., and No. 3. Rubin G. Cohn. To Judge with Jus­ Jay S. Goodman. The Politics, of the Rhode tice: The History and Politics of Judicial Island Constitutional Convention. 1969. Reform. 1973. Number Two—George D. Wolf. Constitu­ No. 4. Ian D. Burman. Lobbying at the Illi­ tional Revision in Pennsylvania: The Dual nois Constitutional Convention. 1973. Tactic of Amendment and Limited Con­ Sturm, Albert L. Thirty Years of State Constitu­ vention. 1969. tion-Making, 1938-1968. New York: National Number Three—John P. Wheeler, Jr. and Municipal League, 1970. Melissa Kinsey, Magnificent Failure: The Sturm, Albert L. Trends in State Constitution- Maryland Constitutional Convention of Making: 1966-1972. Lexington, Ky.: The Coun­ 1967-1968. 1970. cil of State Governments, 1973. Number Four—Richard J. Connors. The Swindler, William F., ed. Sources and Documents Process of Constitutional Revision in New of United States Constitutions. 10 vols, (pro­ Jersey: 1940-1947. 1970. jected). Dobbs Ferry, N.Y.: Oceana Publica­ Number Five—Norman Meller. With An Un­ tions, Inc., 1973—. derstanding Heart: Constitution Making in Wheeler, John P., Jr. The Constitutional Con­ Hawaii. 1971. vention: A Manual on Its Planning, Organiza­ Number Six—Martin L. Faust. Constitution tion and Operation. New York: National Mu­ Making in Missouri: The Convention of nicipal League, 1961. 1943-1944. 1971. Wheeler, John P., Jr., ed. Salient Issues of Consti­ Number Seven—Donna E. Shalala. The City tutional Revision. New York: National Munici­ and the Constitution: The 1967 New York pal League, 1961. TABLE 1 STATE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS Operative during the period January 1, 1972-December 31, 1973

Method and date Name of of creation and Membership: State commission period of operation Number and type Funding Purpose of commission Proposals and action

Alabama. Alabama Constitutional Statutory; Act No. 753, Originally 21: 2 ex officio; $100,000 appropriation Submit recommendations Final report. May 1, Commission Reg. Sess., 1969, ex­ 19 appointed (at least initially; $66,828 ap­ for constitutional re­ 1973, proposed a re­ tended in 1971 and 2 from each congres­ propriation, fiscal year vision and appropriate vised constitution with 1973; Sept. 1969-. sional district). In­ 1971-72; $47,860 ap­ procedure for submis­ commentary; judicial creased in 1971 to 25: 2 propriation, fiscal year sion and adoption of article was approved ex officio; 23 appointed 1972-73; $100,000 ap­ proposed changes by Legislature, and propriation, fiscal years was adopted by the 1973-75.Total:$314.688 voters Dec. 18, 1973. California. California Constitution Legislative; ACR7, 1st Membership varied up to From allocations to Joint Provide factual informa­ Proposed series of changes Revision Commission Extra Sess., 1963, ex­ 80: 20 ex officio, 60 Committee on Legisla­ tion and submit recom­ in entire constitution. tended by resolutions; appointed tive Organization (at mendations for consti­ Piiase I proposals (con­ July 1963-June 1973 least $2,883,315 appro­ tutional revision to cerning basic structure) priation) Joint Committee on were adopted in 1966; Legislative Organiza­ Phase II proposals, tion and to the Legis­ presented as a single lature proposition in 1968, were rejected and were later submitted in series of amendments—some adopted; 10 Phase III amendments were ' adopted Nov. 1972. Final report in April 1971 included an entire proposed revised con­ stitution. Indiana. Indiana Constitutional Legislative; Legislative Initially, 34 members, all No separate appropria­ Study constitution, de­ Proposed series of amend­ Revision Commission Council Resolution, appointed; as reconsti­ tion; financed from termine if changes are ments and recommend­ Sept. 6, 1967, con­ tuted, 29 members, all funds of the Legislative necessary, consider ed establishment of tinued by resolutions; appointed Council need for.convention or permanent constitu­ July 1969-Dec. 1972 for continuous revision, tional revision com­ recommend changes mission in reports to 1969 and 1971 General Assemblies. The voters have approved 30 of 58 commission proposals. Louisiana. Louisiana Constitutional Statutory; Act 295, ap­ 48 members: 2 ex officio $100,000 appropriation Prepare a revision of the Required to report to Revision Commission proved July 10, 1970; plus Lieutenant Gover­ Louisiana Constitution Legislature its recom­ July 1970-May 1972 nor and 27 legislators, "in total or in part for mendations for revi­ 14 of whom were elected submission to the Legis­ sion at least 30 days by legislative delegates; lature" before each annual ses­ 18 appointed by speci­ sion untU total revi­ fied organizations sion is completed; sub­ mitted reports in 1971 and 1972. Minnesota. Minnesota Constitutional Statutory; ch. 806, Minn. 21 members: appointed $25,000 appropriation; Propose "such constitu­ Final report, Feb. 1973. Study Commission Sess. Laws, 1971; June by the Speaker of the additional allocation tional revisions and a recommended updat­ 1971-March 1973 House (6). Senate Com­ fiscal years 1972 and revised format for a ing constitution by a mittee on Committees 1973. $6,157. Total: new Minnesota consti­ comprehensive series of (6). the Chief Justice $31,157 tution as may appear amendments, adoption (1). and the Governor necessary, in prepara­ of a Gateway Amend­ (8) tion for a constitutional ment, a revised consti­ convention if called or tutional format, and as a basis for making creation of another further amendments to study commission. the present constitu­ tion" Montana. Montana Constitutional Statutory; c. 296, Laws of 16 members: 4 each ap­ $149,540 appropriation Prepare for the constitu­ Made preparations for a Convention Commis- Montana, 1971, as pointed by the Speaker (spent $162,624 — tional convention by constitutional conven­ amended by c. 1, Laws, of the House, Senate $13,084 paid from con­ undertakingstudiesand tion, including 3 series Extra Sess., 1971; Committee on Com­ vention appropriation) research and providing of reports, and con­ March 1971-sine die mittees, Governor, and information to the ducted an extensive adjournment of the Supreme Court . (no delegates (without any public relations pro­ constitutional conven­ more than 2 of each recommendation) gram. tion (March 1972) group could be aifili-: ated with the same political party) NewHampshire Commission to Study the Statutory; HB376, c. 351, 10 members: appointed $10,000 appropriation Study the constitution Required to report rec­ State Constitution N. H. Laws, 1973; by the Speaker of the and, if amendments ommendations along Sept., 1973-through House (2), President of are found to be needed, with factual and ex­ the 1974 constitutional the Senate (2), Gover­ recommend such planatory material not convention nor (3). and Supreme amendments to the later than Jan. 1, 1974. Court (3) next constitutional con­ vention Ohio Ohio Constitutional Re­ Statutory; Sees. 103.51- 32 members: 12 appointed $100,000 appropriation Study constitution and Required to submit rec­ vision Commission 103.57, Ohio Rev. Code, from the General As­ for first biennium; submit recommenda­ ommendations to the effective Nov. 26,1969; sembly who appointed $300,000 for biennium tions to the General General Assembly at Nov. 1969-July 19.79 20 members not from beginning July 1, 1971; Assembly; if conveii- least every two years; the General Assembly $300,000 for biennium tion is called, submit first report, Jan. 1972 beginning July 1. 1973. recommendations to it dealt with the Legisla­ Total: $700,000 (convention call was ture—part was adopt­ defeated Nov: 1972) ed; second report, Jan. 1973 dealt with state debt. South Dakota South Dakota Constitu­ Statutory; S.B. 1, S. L., 13 members: 2 ex officio; Fiscad year 1970 appro­ Make comprehensive Required to report find­ tional Revision Corn- 1969, c. 225, approved 11 appointed—by priation. $25,000; 1971, study of the constitu­ ings and recommenda­ March 13, 1969. Speaker of the House $38,500; 1972, $42,000; tion and determine tions to the Legislature amended by S. B. 217. (3), President of the 1973. $44,500; 1974. means to improve and at regular sessions un­ S. L., 1970, c. 19. and Senate (3), Governor $44,500. Total:$194,500 simplify it til discharged. Voters H. B. 750. S. L.. 1973. (3) (no more than 2 rejected one commis­ c. 21; Nov. 1969-July from each'group to be sion proposal in Nov. 1. 1975 members of the same 1970, and approved 4 political party), and revised articles in Nov. the Presiding Judge of 1972. the Supreme Court (2) TABLE 1—Concluded STATE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS

Method and date Name of of creation and ' Membership: Slate commission period of operation Number and type Funding Purpose of commission Proposals and action Texas. Texas Constitutional Re­ Statutory; S. C. R. No. 37 members: appointed $900,000 appropriation Study the need for con­ Submitted report to the vision Commission 1, approved Feb. 12, by an appointment stitutional change and Legislature Nov. 1, 1973; March 1973- committee composed report recommenda­ 1973; required to sub­ March 1974 (60 days of the Governor, Lieu­ tions to the Legislature mit to the cohstitu- after the constitu­ tenant Governor, At- and the constitutional . tional convention legal tional convention torney General, convention drafts of all proposed convenes) Speaker of the House, changes and alterna­ Chief Justice of the tive changes in the Supreme Court, and constitution. Presiding Judge of the Court of Criminal Ap­ peals (subject to rejec­ tion by the Legislature) Utah. Uta_h_ Constitutional Re­ Statutory; c. 89, Laws of 16 members: 1 ex ofiicio; $20,000 appropriation fis­ Study constitution and Mandated to report rec­ vision Study Commis­ Utah. 1969; May 1969- 9 members appointed cal year 1969; $30,000 recommend changes, ommendations at least sion June 30, 1975 —by the Speaker of annually during fiscal including drafts of pro­ 60 days before Legisla­ the House (3), Presi­ years 1970, 1971, and posed changes ture convenes. Interim dent of the Senate (3), 1972. Total: $110,000 report Jan. 1971 rec­ and Governor (3) (no ommended revision of more than 2 of each legislativearticle,which group to be from same was approved by the political party) electorate Nov. 1972; interim report Jan. 1973 recommended re­ vision of executive article. TABLE 2 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS 1972-1973

Convention Type of Referendum on Preparatory Convention Convention Referendum on State dates convention convention question body Appropriations delegates proposals convention proposals Jan. 5-30, 1973 Limited No popular refer­ Louisiana Con­ $350,000 appropriation 132 (105 elected The enabling Within 30 days after sub­ (9 days in ses­ endum; legis­ stitutional and $90,000 from Aug. 19, 1972, act requires mission of the proposed sion) ; July 5, lative Act 2 Revision the Board of Liqui­ from House dis­ the conven­ draft of a new constitu­ •1973-Jan. 19, providing for tiie Commission dation for fiscal year tricts on non­ tion to tion, the Governor is re­ 1974 convention was prepared 1972-73; $2.5 mil­ partisan basis; complete quired to call an election approved by tiie some prelim­ lion appropriation in 27 appointed by its work by to submit the proposed Governor May inary studies 1973. Total: Governor, 12 Jan. 19, constitution to the voters 26, 1972 used by the $2,940,000 representing 1974 convention specified inter­ est groups, 15 at large) ^ Nov. 29-Dec. 1, Unlimited Nov. 3. 1970 Montana Con­ $499,281 100 (Elected Nov. New consti­ June 6, 1972: constitution 1971; Jan. 17- Vote: 133,482 stitution Re­ 2. 1971, from tution plus adopted; March 24, 71,643 • vision Com­ House districts; 3 alterna­ Vote: 116,415 1972 mission partisan) tive propo­ 113,883 (study); and sitions sub­ bicameral Legislature, le­ Montana mitted sep­ galized gambling, and Constitutional arately death penalty approved Convention Commission (preparatory) North Dakota.. AprU 6-8, 1971; Unlimited Sept. 1, 1970 (in None (Subcom­ $600,000 98 (Elected Nov. New consti­ April 28, 1972: constitution Jan. 3-Feb. form of a con­ mittee of 3, 1970, from tution plus rejected; 17, 1972 stitutional Legislative representative 4 alterna­ Vote: 64,312 amendment) Research districts; non­ tive propo­ 107,249 Vote: 56,734 Committee, partisan) sitions sub­ nullifying effectiveness of 40.094 Legislative mitted sei)- vote on the 4 propositions Council, . arately made prelim­ inary study of the con­ Rhode Island... Sept. 4-Oct. 4, Limited Aug. 7, 1973 stitution) 100 (2 delegates 7 amend­ Nov. 6, 1973: 7 amend­ 1973 Vote: 21,302 None $20,000 elected Aug. 7, ments ments submitted; 5 21.210 1973 from each adopted state senatorial district; partisan basis) 20 THE BOOK OF THE STATES TABLE 3 PROCEDURES FOR CALLING CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS

Procedure for calling constitutional convention

Approval •" Popular ratification Vote required by two Referendum of State or other jurisdiction in Legislatureia.) sesstons vote convention proposals

Alabama Maj. No ME ME Alaska Maj.(b) No MP MP Arizona Maj. No MP MP Arkansas Maj.(c) No MP MP California 2/3 No MP MP Colorado 2/3 No MP ME Connecticut 2/3(b) No ME ME Delaware ; 2/3 No MP X Florida (d) MP MP Georgia 2/3 No None MP Hawaii Maj.(b) No MP MPfe) Idaho 2/3 No MP MP Illinois 3/5(b) No (f) MP Indiana Maj.(c) No MP MP Iowa Majr(b) No MP MP Kansas 2/3 No MP MP Kentucky Maj. Yes MP(g) X Louisiana , Maj.(c) No MP(h) X(h) Maine 2/3(i) No None ME Maryland Maj.(b) No ME MP Massachusetts Maj.(c) No MP X Michigan. Maj.(b) No MP MP Minnesota 2/3 No ME (J) Mississippi Maj. No None X Missouri Maj.(b) No MP MP Montana 2/3 (b) No MP ME Nebraska 3/S No MP(k) MP Nevada 2/3 ' No ME X New Hampshire Maj.(b) No MP (1) New Jersey Maj.(m) No MP MP New Mexico ; 2/3 No MP MP New York Maj.(b) No MP MP North Carolina. . 2/3 No ME ME North Dakota Maj. No MP ME Ohio 2/3(b) No MP MP Oklahoma '... .^.. (b) No MP MP Oregon Maj. No MP X Pennsylvania Maj.(c) No MP MP Rhode Island Maj.(c) No MP MP South Carolina 2/3 No ME X South Dakota 3/4 No MP (n) Tennessee -: Maj.(o) No MP MP Texas Maj.(c) No MP MP Utah 2/3 No ME ME Vermont Maj.(c) No MP Y Virginia. 2/3 No MP MP Washington 2/3 No ME ME West Virginia Maj. No ME ME Wisconsin Maj. No MP X Wyoming 2/3 No ME Y-

American Samoa (P) ME(q) Guam Puerto Rico 2/3 No MP MP Virgin Islands Maj.(r) No MP ME ME—Majority voting in election. (d) The power to call a convention is reserved to petition by MP—Majority voting on the proposition. the people. X—There appears to be no constitutional or general statu­ (e)- Majority must be 35 percent of total votes cast at tory provision for the submission of convention proposals to general election; or at a special election, the majority must be the electorate in these States, biit in practice the Legislature 30 percent of the number of registered voters. may provide by statute for popular ratification of convention (f) Majority voting in election or 3/5 voting on issue. proposals in specific instances. (g) Must equal 1/4 of qualified voters at last general election, Y—Popular ratification required but no provision for size (h) 1921 convention call was ratified by the electorate after of vote. enactment by the Legislature. The document itself was not. (a) The entries in this column refer to the percentage of The current convention call was by legislative act only. The elected members in each house required to initiate the proce­ act calls for ratification by the electorate. dure for calling a constitutional convention. (i) H of those voting. (b) The question of calling a convention must be submitted (j) 3/5 voting on question. to the electorate every 10 years in Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, New (k) Must be 35 percent of total votes cast at election. Hampshire; every l.o years in Michigan; every 20 years in (I) 2/3 voting on question. Illinois, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, New York, Ohio and (m) The constitution does not provide for the calling of a Oklahoma. Connecticut may submit question to the electorate constitutional convention. A convention was called however after 10 years and must submit it after 20 years. by legislation which v/as submitted to the people in referendum. (c) In the following States, the constitution does not provide (n) Submitted to voters in a special election in a manner to or the calling of a constitutional convention. Legislative be determined by the convention. authority to call such a convention has been established in (o) The convention may not be held more than once in six practice in Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana and Texas by court years. decisions and precedents; in Pennsylvania by statute; in (p) Convention called by Governor at S-year intervals. Dele­ Rhode Island by advisory opinion of the court; and in Vermont gates elected by county councils. by the opinion of the Attorney General. In Massachusetts the (q) Approval of Secretary of the Interior required. Legislature exercised an unchallenged assumption of this power. (r) The convention may not be held more than once In 5 years. • CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS 21 TABLE 4 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROCEDURE: BY THE LEGISLATURE

Limitations on Legislative vote Approval Ratification the number of Slate or required by two by amendments submitted other jurisdiction for proposal(a) sesstons electorate at one election

Alabama 3/S No MA None Alaska 2/3 No MA None Arizona Maj. No MA None Arkansas Maj. No MA (b) California 2/3 No MA None Colorado. . .' 2/3 No MA None(c) Connecticut (d) (d) MA None Delaware 2/3 Yes None None Florida 3/5 No MA None Georgia 2/3 No MA None Hawaii , (e) (e) MA None Idaho 2/3 No MA None Illinois 3/5 No (f) None(c) Indiana Maj. Yes MA None Iowa , Maj. Yes MA None Kansas 2/3 No MA 5 Kentucky 3/5 No MA 2 Louisiana 2/3 No MA(g) None Maine , 2/3 (h) No MA None Maryland 3/S No MA None . Massachusetts... (1) Yes MA None Michigan 2/3 No MA None Minnesota. . . .\ . Maj. No ME None Mississippi , 2/3(h) No MA None Missouri Maj. No MA None Montana 0) No MA None Nebraska , 3/5 No MA(k) None Nevada , Maj. Yes MA None New Hampshire. , 3/5 No (1) None New Jersey (m) (m) MA None •New Mexico Maj.(n) No MA(n) None New York Maj. Yea MA None North Carolina.. 3/5 No MA None North Dakota... Maj. No MA None Ohio 3/5 No MA None Oklahoma Maj. No ME(o) None Oregon Maj. No MA None Pennsylvania Maj. Yes(p) MA None Rhode Island Maj. Yes (q) None South Carolina.. 2/3 Yes(r) MA None South Dakota... Maj. No MA None Tennessee (a) Yes ME(t) None Texas 2/3 No MA None Utah 2/3 No MA None Vermont (u) Yes MA None Virginia Maj. Yes. MA None Washington 2/3 No MA None West Virginia.... 2/3 No MA None Wisconsin Maj. Yes MA None Wyoming 2/3 No ME None American Samoa. 3/5 No MA(v) None Guam (w) Puerto Rico 2/3(x) No MA TTPI(y) Virgin Islands 2/3 No' MA None MA—Majority vote on amendment. Legislature and ratified by H vote of the electorate and H ME—Majority vote in election. /• vote in each county. (a) In all States not otherwise noted, the figure shown in this (o) The Legislature, by % vote, may require a special election column refers to percentage of elected members in each house on amendments. If the amendment is voted upon at a special required for approval of proposed constitutional amendments. election, ratification is by a majority vote on the amendment. (b) General Assembly limited to three; no limit on number of The Legislature may amend certain sections of the constitution initiative proposals. relating to the Corporation Commission by simple majority (c) Legislature may not propose amendments to more than vote, without popular ratification. six articles at the same session in Colorado; Illinois: three articles. (p) Consecutively elected. (d) Majority vote in each house in two sessions or H vote in (q) Three-fifths of voters on amendment. each house in one session. (r) Final approval in Legislature by majority of quorum (e) Approval by % vote in each house in one session or by after popular ratification. majority in two successive sessions. (s) Majority members elected, first passage; H members (f) Majority voting in. election or 3/5 voting on amendment. elected, second passage. (g) If five or fewer political subdivisions of the State affected, (t) Majority of all citizens voting for Governor. majority in State as a whole and also in affected political sub- (u) Two-thirds vote Senate, majority vote House, first pas­ division(s) required. sage; majority both houses, second passage. Since 1910, amend­ (h^ Two-thirds of "those voting on issue in each house;'Missis- ments may be submitted only at ten-year intervals. sippi: should include not less than a majority elected to each (v) Approval by Secretary of the Interior required. house. (w) The Guam Legislature has no authority to amend the (i) Majority of members elected sitting in joint session. "Organic Act." Action to amend can be accomplished only by (j) Two-thirds of total combined membership of both houses. the U.S. Congress. (k) Votes cast in favor of amendment must be at least 35 (x) If proposed amendment is approved by a K vote in the percent of total vote at election. Legislature, it is submitted-to voters at a special referendum; ' (1) Two-thirds of voters on amendment. if approved by a Ji vote in the Legislature, the referendum is (m) Three-fifths of all members of each house; or majority of held at next general election. all members of each house for two successive sessions. (y) The Congress of Micronesia has no authority to amend or (n) Amendments dealing with certain sections on elective change an order of the Secretary of the Interior, but it may peti­ franchise and education must be proposed by Ji vote of the tion and request the Secretary to do so. 22 THE BOOK OF THE STATES TABLE 5 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROCEDURE: BY INITIATIVE

State or other Referendum jurisdiction Size of petition vote

Arizona 15% of total voters for Governor at last election Majority vote on amendment Arkansas 10% of voters for Governor at last election including 5% in Majority vote on amendment each of 15 counties California 8% of total voters for Governor at last election Majority vote on amendment Colorado 8% of legal voters for Secretary of State at last election Majority vote on amendment Florida 8% of total votes cast in J^ of the congressional districts and Majority vote on amendment 8% of the total votes cast in the State in the last election for presidential electors Illlnol8(a) 8% of the total votes cast for candidates for Governor at last Majority voting in election or 3/5 election voting on the issue Massachusetts. .. 3% of total vote for Governor at preceding biennial state 30% of total voters at election and election, no more than J^ from any one county majority vote on amendment Michigan • 10% of total voters for Governor at last election Majority vote on amendment Missouri 8% of legal voters for Governor at last election in each of Majority vote on amendment 2/3 of the congressional districts in the State (b'l Montana 10% of the qualified electors of the State^to include at least Majority vote on amendment 10% of the qualified electors in each of 2/5 of the legisla­ tive districts Nebraska 10% of total votes for Governor at last election including Majority vote on amendment (c) 5% in each of 2/5 of the counties Nevada 10% of total voters who voted in 75% of the counties and Majority vote on amendment in 10% of the voters who voted in the entire State at the last two consecutive general elec­ general election tions North Dakota.... 20,000 electors Majority vote on amendment Ohio 10% of electors which must include 5% of voters for Gover­ Majority vote on amendment nor at last election in each of M of the counties Oklahoma 15% of legal voters for office receiving highest number of Majority voting in election (d) votes in last general state election Oregon 8% of the total votes for Governor at last election Majority vote on amendment . South Dakota.... 10% of total votes for Governor in last election Majority vote on amendment Wyoming 15% of those who voted in last general election and resident Majority of those voting in the in at least 2/3 of the counties of the State preceding general election Virgin Islands Not less than 10% of qualifiecl voters of the Territory Majority vote on amendment at next general election

(a) People may petition to amend only the Legislative Article of total vote at election. -Article IV. (d) If amendment is voted on at general election, ratification (b) Legislature is empowered to fix a smaller percentage. is by majority voting in election. If it is voted on at a special (c) Votes cast in favor of amendment must be at least 35% election, ratification is by majority vote on the amendment. CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS 23 TABLE 6 GENERAL INFORMATION ON STATE CONSTITUTIONS Number Effective Estimated Number of of date of length amendments State or other consti­ present (number of jurisdiction tutions Dates of adoption constitution words) Proposed Adoptea 6 1819; 1861; 1865; 1868; 1901 106,000 497 326 1875; 1901 1 1956 1959 12,000 12 11 1 1911 1912 18,500 141 77 S 1836; 1861; 1864; 1868; 1874 1874 40,170 (a) , 53

2 1849; 1879 1879 68,000 667 392 1 1876 1876 40,190 i47(b) 53(b) 4 1818(c); 1965 1965 7,959 '5 4 4 1776; 1792; 1831; 1897 1897 22,000 (a) 83

6 1839; 1861; 1865; 1868; 1885; 1969 21,286 15 10 1968 8 1777; 1789; 1798; 1861; 1945 500,000 1.016 767 1865; 1868; 1877; 1945 Hawaii 3 1950; 1958; 1968 1968 11,904 41 38 1 1889 1890 22,280 125 85

lUlnols 4 1818; 1848; 1870; 1970 1971 17,500 0 0 2 1816; 1851 1851 11,120 52 29 2 1846; 1857 j 1857 11,200 41 36(d) 1 1859 1861 14,500 93 65(d)

4 1792; 1799; 1850; 1891 1891 21,500 47 20 10 1812; 1845; 1852; 1861; 1921 256,000 749 498 1864; 1868; 1879; 1898; 1913; 1921 1 1820 1820 20,000 143 123(e) 4 1776; 1851; 1864; 1867 1867 37,300 199 160

1 1780 1780 36,000 115 97 4 1835; 1850; 1908; 1963 1964 19,867 13 6 1 1858 1858 20,080 186 100 4 1817; 1832; 1869; 1890 1890 25,742 106 37

4 1820; 1865; 1875; 1945 1945 33,260 52 37 2 1889; 1972 1973 11,250 . 0 0 2 1866; 1875 1875 19.975 238 164 1 1864 1864 17,270 117 70

New Hampshire. .. 2 1776; 1784(f) 1784 12,200 13S(f) 61(f) 3 1776; 1844; 1947 1947 16,030 23 17 1 1911 1912 • 26,136 185 88 5 1777; 1822; 1846; 18^9; 1894 47,000 249 172 1894

North Carolina.... 3 1776; 1868; 1970 1971 17,000 5 5 1 1889 1889 31,470 (a) 90 Ohio 2 1802; 1851 1851 30,000 195 110 1 1907 . 1907 63,569 196 85

1 1859 1859 23,000 284 143 4 1776; 1790; 1838; 1873; 1968(g) 1873;1968 24,750 9 6 1 1843(c) 1843 21,040 79 . 42 South Carolina.... 6 1776; 1778; 1790; 1865; 1895 45,740 430 417 1868; 1895

1 1889 1889 24,000 161 82 3 1796; 1835; 1870 1870 15,150 34 19 5 1845; 1861; 1866; 1869; 1876 1876 54,000 343 218 Utah 1 1896 1896 20,990 103 60

3 1777; 1786; 1793 1793 7,600 200 44 Virginia 6 1776;1830;1851; 1868; 1902; 1970 1971 8,000 2 2 1 1889 . 1889 26,930 103 61 2 1863; 1872 1872 22,970 74 42

1 1848 1848 17,966 . 127 98(d) 1 1889 1890 23,170 67 36 American Samoa. . 2 1960; 1967 1967 5,000 9 5 Puerto Rico 1 1952 1952 9,338 6 6 (a) Data not available. (e) One adopted amendment will not become effective until (b) Information only available from 1912 to present. the Legislature enacts further legislation. (c) Colonial charters with some alterations, in Connecticut (f) The constitution of 1784 was extensively amended, rear­ (1638, 1662) and Rhode Island (1663), served as the first con­ ranged and clarified in 1793. Figures show proposals and adop­ stitutions for these States. tions since 1793. (d) Amendments nullified by Supreme Court. Iowa: three on (g) Certain sections were revised by limited convention. procedural grounds; Kansas: one; Wisconsin: two. Elections

ELECTION LEGISLATION

BY RICHARD J. CARLSON*

VER THE PAST two ycars state election creasing number of court challenges. On I systems have been subject to rapid March 21, 1972, in the case of Dunn v. O and significant change, with the Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330, the U.S. Su­ United States Suprenie Court again at the preme Court abolished all such require­ forefront of the developments. Recent ments when it struck down Tennessee's changes made the legally eligible elec­ one-year state and three-nionth county torate in the 1972 presidential election residency requirements as unconstitu­ the most inclusive in American history. tional under the equal protection clause The Twenty-sixth Amendment gave 18, of the Fourteenth Amendment. The deci­ 19 and 20 year olds the right to vote and sion was reached by a 6-1 majority. the Supreme Court in a major decision in­ In overturning the Tennessee law, the validated state durational residency re­ Court relied on a strict standard of equal quirements, thereby enfranchising an protection review that has come to be estimated 5 to 8 million mobile Ameri­ known as the "compelling state interest" cans. Through the Voting Rights Act test. Under this standard, a State must Amendments of 1970, Congress provided demonstrate that laws which deny or re­ expanded absentee voting and registra­ strict fundamental personal rights must tion opportunities in voting for President. be "necessary" to further a "compelling The States, too, have been active in less state interest" and in a way that is the dramatic ways in attempts to upgrade the least burdensome to the personal right administration of elections, while looking involved. In Dunn, the Court concluded for new ways to serve the expanded elec­ that the "compelling state interest" test torate. was applicable because durational resi­ dency requirements affected two constitu­ DURATIONAL RESIDENCY tionally protected rights: the right to vote The 50 States have traditionally re­ and the right to travel. The decision to quired their residents to have lived in invoke this test was crucial, since no state the State for a specified length of time law reviewed under it has been upheld before qualifying to vote, usually a year by the Court. or six months. In 1972, 25 States required The practical effect of a durational a minimum of one year's residence with residency requirement is to separate resi­ the rest requiring six months or less. In dents into two broad categories: old resi­ recent years these durational residency dents who may vote, and new residents requirements have come under an in- who may not. The Court reaffirmed an earlier position that States were free to *Mr. Carlson is Director of the National Mu­ require voters to be bona fide residents nicipal League's Election Systems Project. This article was written with the assistance of Jeanne in order "to preserve the basic conception Richman. of a political community." But, the Court 24 CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS 25 noted, "Tennessee insists that in addition 30-day durational residency require­ to being a resident, a would-be voter must ments. have been a resident for a year in the State and three months in the county." REGISTRATION CLOSING The State of Tennessee argued that its The question of the permissible length waiting period was "necessary" to insure of registration closing dates was subse­ purity of the ballot box and also to guar­ quently considered by the Court in Mar­ antee that voters would be able to exercise ston V. Lewis, 41 U.S.L.W. 3498 (1973) their voting rights "more intelligently." and Burns v. Fortson, 41 U.S.L.W. 3499 The Court agreed that the prevention of (1973), where the issue was the consti­ fraud—keeping nonresidents from voting tutionality of 50-day closing dates in —was a compelling governmental goal, Arizona and Georgia. The Court upheld but that "durational residency laws bar the 50-day closing periods in both States newly arrived, residents from the fran­ in per curiam opinions. In Marston, the chise along with nonresidents." More Court accepted the judgment of the Ari­ importantly, the Court concluded that zona Legislature that the 50-day period fraud is more effectively prevented in was "necessary" to promote the State's Tennessee by a system of voter registra­ "important interest" in accurate voter tion and a variety of criminal laws. It lists, ,a slight variation of the "compel­ noted that the 30-day period before an ling" state interest test. In Arizona, volun­ election, when Tennessee closes registra­ teer deputy registrars do much of the tion, was "an ample period of time for voter registration in the State. In Mari­ the State to complete whatever admin­ copa County (Phoenix) these volunteers istrative tasks are necessary to prevent produce "an average of 1.13 mistakes per fraud—and a year or three months, too voter registration" which the county re­ much." The Court also reasoned that a corder must correct before he can certify durational residency law was not neces­ the voters list for an election. The prob­ sary to ensure knowledgeable voters, lem was compounded by the fact that the given modern communications and "the elections personnel had to interrupt the clear indication that campaign spending processing of registration affidavits to ad­ and voter education occur largely during minister a fall primary. A majority of the the month before an election." Court agreed that in Arizona administra­ For the most part, the Court's decision tive considerations justified a registration in the Dunn case was implemented by all close in excess of 30 days, the standard States in time for the November 1972 alluded to in Dunn. The Court applied election. A majority of States came into the same logic to the Georgia statute, but compliance through administrative ac­ it also noted that a "50-day period ap­ tion following opinions by their At- proaches the outer constitutional limits orneys General or court actions. Several in this area." Legislatures were able to act in time to Justice Thurgood Marshall, who wrote make the necessary' changes in state law. the majority opinion in Dunn, dissented The Alaska and Florida Legislatures im­ in both Marston and Burns and was posed durational residency periods of up joined by Justices William O. Douglas to 75 days, but these were subsequently and William J. Brennan. Justice Mar­ declared unconstitutional by federal dis­ shall noted that the majority did not im­ trict courts. Some confusion was created pose the full measure of the "compelling, by the failure of a few States to distin­ interest" test when it failed to examine guish between durational residency re­ alternatives the States might have chosen quirements and a registration closing that were less burdensome to voters than period. For example, the Court's refer­ a 50-day registration close. In his dissent ence to a 30-day period before an election to Marston, he argued that the justifica­ when registration is closed as being tions presented were "directed almost "ample" time to check the accuracy of exclusively to what can be considered registration lists was wrongly interpreted readily solvable problems caused by un­ by some States as authorization to impose trained personnel in a relatively small 26 THE BOOK OF THE STATES office." In his dissent to Burns, Justice in water management district elections to Marshall again argued that appellees property owners and that apportioned "did not show that it was impossible to votes among them on the basis of the increase the size of the registrars' staffs assessed valuation of their land. (Salyer or the efficiency of their operations" in­ Land Company v. Tulare Lake Basin stead of closing registration 50 days be­ Water Storage District, 41 U.S.L.W. 4390 fore an election. and Associated Enterprises, Inc. v. Toltec^ in Rosario v. Rockefeller, 41 U.S.L.W. Watershed Improvement District, 41 4401 (1973), the Court considered a dif­ U.S.L.W. 4397.) A majority of the Court ferent kind of registration deadline. It found that water storage or improvement upheld a New York law that requires a districts were of such limited purpose that voter to enroll-in a party at least 30 days their activities disproportionately aflEected before the November general election in landowners as a class, therefore justifying order to vote in a presidential primary the exclusion of non-property-owning the following June or a nonpresidential residents and lessees from the franchise. primary the following September. Per­ The Court ruled the limited scope of the sons eligible to vote for the first time are districts' powers made them exempt from exempt from this restriction. The plain­ earlier "one man, one vote" decisions. It tiffs had been eligible to register before further ruled that weighting the vote ac­ the October 2, 1971, cutoff but failed to cording to acreage held or the assessed do so. Consequently, they were unable to value of the land was also permissible be­ vote in the June primary eight months cause the costs of running the districts later. They claimed the statute deprived were apportioned among landowners on them of their right to vote and abridged the basis of benefits received. their freedom^ to associate with the party In dissent, Justice Douglas, joined by of their choice. New York State argued Justices Brennan and Marshall, argued that its law was "necessary" to prevent that all residents of the districts were di­ raiding, or the cross-over of the members rectly affected by policies in such impor­ of one party into another's primary to tant areas as flood control and should "defeat a candidate who is adverse to the have a voice in the election of the dis­ interests they care to advance." Without tricts' governing boards. Justice Douglas specifying the standard of review, the five- also argued that the water districts in man majority concluded that "New York both States exercised "important govern­ did not prohibit the petitioners from vot­ mental functions" such as the levying and ing in the 1972 primary election or from collecting of special assessments and exer­ associating with the political party of cising the power of eminent domain and their choice. It merely imposed a legit­ therefore should be judged by the same imate time limitation on their enroll­ "one man, one vote" standard the Court ment, which they chose to disregard." has applied in the past to units of govern­ In dissent. Justice Lewis F. Powell, ment with more general authority. joined by Justices Douglas, Brennan and At the time of the Dunn decision, it Marshall, concluded that the statute seemed clear that, in most instances, the could not withstand the "compelling state Court would apply the rigorous "com­ interest" test. They argued that the State pelling state interest" test to state laws had not demonstrated that an eight- or 11- that limited or burdened the right to month cutoff for party enrollment was vote. Since Dunn, however, the Court has necessary to prevent raiding and that a not applied the test to any of the voter shorter period would not have been just qualifications cases that it has considered. as effective. The Court's decisions since then indicate a new sentiment among a majority of the VOTER QUALIFICATIONS justices that reflects recent changes in the On March 20^ 1973, the same week the Court's membership. The most recent Rosario decision was handed down, the actions of the. Court suggest that in the im­ Supreme Court upheld statutes in Cali­ mediate future it will be more indulgent fornia and Wyoming that limited voting toward state regulation of the franchise CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS 27 than it has been since the compelling tive in making registration forms widely interest doctrine was first applied in the available in public buildings and allow­ late 1960s. ing any qualified voter to register by mail. The only State with a similar procedure VOTER REGISTRATION is Texas, where registration forms are Maryland and Minnesota have adopted periodically printed in newspapers. mail registration systems that should sig­ Laws requiring statewide voter registra­ nificantly expand registration opportu­ tion were passed in Iowa, Minnesota, and nities in both States when they become Missouri. Previously, registration in each effective in 1974. Under the Minnesota of these States was limited to the larger law, a voter may register to vote by filling cities and counties. These actions leave out a standard form and mailing it to his Ohio and Wisconsin as the only States local registrar of voters. The forms may where there is no registration in selected also be distributed to voters by groups portions of the State. In North Dakota, which engage in registration drives. Min­ there is no prior registration in any part nesota voters who do not register in per­ of the State. son or by mail may also register in their polling places on election day under the COMPUTERIZED REGisTRATibN new system. In 1973, Kentucky became the fifth The Maryland law authorizes the State State to establish a central computerized Administrator of Elections to establish file of all registered voters in the State. rules for a statewide system of mail regis­ Under the new system, county clerks are tration. The plan is quite similar to that required to send copies of registration instituted in Minnesota. However, Mary­ forms to the State Board of Elections land voters must register in a political where they are placed on a master com­ party in order to vote in a primary elec­ puter file. The board is responsible for tion. They will be able to do so by mail purging the names of voters who fail to under the new law. Minnesota does not vote in four consecutive years or who require registration prior to its primary otherwise become ineligible to vote. The elections. In Maryland, local jurisdictions board is also responsible for furnishing may exempt themselves from statewide each county clerk lists of all registered legislation and 19 counties have chosen voters in their county by precinct. The not to institute mail registration. As a precinct lists are then used to identify result, the law will apply only to Har­ voters at the polls on election day. The ford, Howard, Montgomery, and Prince Kentucky law requires every voter in the Georges Counties, and Baltimore city. State to reregister sometime between the Every State with registration allows November general elections in 1972 and voters to-register by mail. In most in­ 1973. Those voting in November 1972 stances absentee registration is limited to were able to reregister by mail. certain classes of voters, e.g., those who are Wyoming, Rhode Island and Louisiana ill or physically disabled. Under the fed­ may soon follow suit. Each of these States eral Voting Rights Act Amendments of has authorized the development of a 1970, each State must allow voters who are statewide system of registration record absent from their election districts to keeping. The Louisiana program is ex­ register by mail in presidential elections. pected to be funded in 1974. In Massa­ Some States allow any otherwise qualified chusetts, the Legislative Research Coun­ voter to register absentee, and most allow cil has recommended the use of voter military personnel and their families to identification cards in conjunction with register at the same time they request an a computerized state voter identification absentee ballot under the^ provisions of center. the federal Voting Assistance Act of 1955. South Carolina was the first State to In each of these instances, however, regis­ establish a statewide computerized list of tration forms are available only upon the registered voters in 1967, followed by written request of the voter. The Mary­ Delaware in 1969 and Virginia and land and Minnesota statutes are distinc­ Alaska in 1970. Oregon offers a similar 28 THE BOOK OF THE STATES service to its counties on an optional voting and to file registration statistics. basis. The use of computerized lists at The Wyoming Secretary of State has been the state level is designed to provide local designated as the chief electoral officer of officials with accurate and up-to-date lists that State with responsibility for bringing of registered voters. Computerization is uniformity to election procedures. In also intended to facilitate transfers of Kansas, all rules and regulations promul­ registration between jurisdictions, the gated by county officials must now be cancellation of duplicate registrations, submitted to the Secretary of State for and the purging of ineligible voters. Cen­ approval. Georgia has provided for a tralization of record keeping may also chief administrative officer to be ap­ help States provide a general manage­ pointed by the State Board of Elections. ment overview of registration activities Some reorganization may also be in the at the local level. offing for such States as Rhode Island, where a legislative commission will re­ STATE ADMINISTRATION port to the Legislature in 1974 with A handful of States have acted to recommendations for revising the elec­ strengthen their role in the administra­ tion law. tion of elections. In Tennessee, a coordi­ nator of elections, appointed by the Sec­ CAMPAIGN FINANCING retary of State, will serve as chief electoral Sparked by national scandals over cam­ officer with power to make regulations paign contributions and expenditures in and to ensure uniform application of the connection with the 1972 presidential election code. His duties include supervi­ election, a number of Legislatures tight­ sion of all elections, issuing instructions to ened state regulation of campaign financ­ all local election officials for the conduct ing practices. State concern focused on the cf registration and voting, preparation of same issues raised in the congressional training programs for local officials, and debate over federal legislation: limits on distribution of forms and supplies at state contributions and expenditures, disclo­ expense. The coordinator may investigate sure of both sources and amounts, meas­ local administration of elections and vio­ ures to prevent "laundering" of funds by lations of the election code. In addition, channeling them through campaign com­ the Tennessee State Board of Elections mittees, restrictions on advertising, and has been replaced by a three-member, methods of public financing for political bipartisan state election commission campaigns. elected by the General Assembly. The The 1973 session of the Texas Legis­ commission has the power to appoint lature adopted the year's first "post- and remove the five-member election Watergate" state law on campaign financ­ commission in each county. ing, which includes a novel system of civil In Illinois, the Legislature has imple­ penalties that could make violations too mented a constitutional provision calling expensive to risk. A key provision makes for a State Board of Elections that has any candidate, political committee, or "general supervision over the administra­ contributor civilly liable to all other op­ tion of the registration and election laws posing candidates for attorneys' fees and throughout the State." The constitution for double the amount of any unlawful provides that "no political party shall contribution or expenditure, and civilly have a majority of members on the liable to the State for triple the amount. Board." The new board will consist of The law requires disclosure of any four members appointed by the Governor amount in excess of $100, the reporting from nominees submitted by the leaders of all contributors to a political com­ of both houses of the General Assembly. mittee, and it defines strictly the uses that Tie votes are to be settled by lot, with the may be made of campaign funds. losing member withdrawing his vote. Florida also adopted a comprehensive Indiana now requires its county elec­ new code, setting top expenditure limits tion boards to report each January to the of $350,000 for general elections and State Election Board on their conduct of $250,000 for both the first and second CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS 29 (runoflf) primary; for other state offices election. The date for Nevada's presi­ limits are $250,000 and $150,000 respec­ dential primary will be the fourth Tues­ tively for general and primary elections; day in May. Kentucky and Georgia will $100,000 for all Supreme Court judgeship move to a presidential primary in 1976. contests, and $25,000 for congressional In Georgia, each party that polled 20 per­ and local races. The law also sets strict cent of the votes cast for President at the., disclosure standards for reporting the preceding election will participate in the sources of contribution's that exceed $100. primary scheduled for the third Tuesday Any donor contributing more than $500 in March. Rhode Island moved the presi­ will now have to register with the Sec­ dential primary date from the second retary of State. The measure increases the Tuesday in April to the fourth Tuesday accountability for campaign reporting by in May. Some shifting of state primary holding candidates responsible for the dates also took place. Texas moved its accuracy of all campaign financial re­ prirriary from spring to late sumriier; ports. Ohio from spring to fall. Hawaii established a Campaign Spend­ In a major development, the Supreme ing Commission to oversee the State's Court in Bullock v. Carter, 405 U.S. 134 campaign finance law. It also set report­ (1972), held that the Texas system of ing requirements for contributions in ex­ financing primaries largely through can­ cess of $250, tightened political committee didate's filing fees was unconstitutionally procedures for keeping records and autho­ restrictive. The Court ruled that the rizing expenditures, and set limits on Texas system prevented potential candi­ total campaign costs ranging from 25 dates from seeking nomination because cents per voter for most offices to 50 cents of inability to pay their apportioned per voter for gubernatorial contests. share. At the same time, the Court said Another issue now on its way up the system denied voters who wished to through the federal courts is the question support certain candidates an opportu­ of accountability for 'media advertising nity to express a preference. The Court for or against a candidate or ballot issue. recognized a State's legitimate objective Elsewhere, Nevada limited expendi­ in avoiding overcrowded ballots and was tures in state legislative campaigns to careful to stop short of a blanket censure $15,000 while such contests in Wyoming of filing fees, but it found the Texas fee were limited to $2,000. Utah and New schedule, which amounted to $6,000 for Jersey tightened record-keeping provi­ the office of county judge, so onerous as sions and Arizona added labor organiza­ tO'be restrictive of the franchise. Stating tions to groups which may not contribute that "it is difficult to single out any [gov­ to political campaigns. Maine and Iowa ernmental function] of a higher order moved cautiously into the area of public than the conduct of elections,''- the Court financing by authorizing $1 of state in­ said that it seems appropriate that a pri­ come tax payments to be earmarked for mary system designed to give voters some contributions to a political party. influence at the nominating stage should spread the cost among all voters. PRIMARY ELECTIONS In other developments. New York be­ Primaries continue to be a major show­ came one of the few Northern States to case for the political individuality of the establish runoff primaries. Its new law States. Three more States adopted provi­ applies only, to the city of New York and sions for presidential preference pri­ only if a candidate for a city wide nomina­ maries. Nevada will allow the Secretary tion fails to win 40 percent of his party's of State to place on the ballot the name vote. A statutory change in Utah will per­ of any presidential candidate who in his mit a primary only when more than two judgment has attracted sufficient atten­ candidates have filed for a position; tion from the national news media, or who has submitted petitions representing OFFICE OF FEDERAL ELECTIONS 1 percent of the vote cast for his party's In the last few years Congress has ex­ presidential candidate at the preceding hibited a growing interest in the conduct 30 THE BOOK OF THE STATES of elections among the States, most re­ by petition and elected at the August cently with passage of the Federal Elec­ primary. , tion Campaign Act of 1971, which created Tennessee and Maryland now allow 17 the Office of Federal Elections within the year olds to vote in primary elections if U.S. General Accounting Office. In addi­ they will be 18 by the time of the general tion to monitoring reports of campaign election. Texas has provided for state contributions and expenditures in federal financing of primary elections after the elections, the new office was given the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated its sys­ additional responsibility to "serve as a tem of filing fees. Before the decision, national clearinghouse for information primaries were financed by the political in respect to the administration of elec­ parties through the assessment of filing tions." Under this provision a clearing­ tees. In a statewide referendum, the voters house was established within the Office of of Maine chose to eliminate the party- Federal Elections to conduct independent column ballot in favor of the office-block studies of election administration. Since ballot. Colorado and New Jersey have its formation, the clearinghouse has com­ authorized the use of electronic vote total­ pleted a study of election difficulties in ing systems. Massachusetts has adopted seven cities and counties across the absentee voting in primary elections, re­ country, initiated a monthly compilation ducing to six the number of States which of proposed and enacted state and federal do not. A new Minnesota law provides legislation as well as state and federal that campaign workers may not be denied judicial decisions, and commissioned the access to apartment houses, dormitories, creation of an automated mailing list of mobile home parks, or other multiple more than 7,000 state and local election dwelling units. The State also provided officials and a comprehensive survey of for the joint nomination and election of current administrative practices. As a Governor and Lieutenant Governor. national center for information on elec­ tion administration and a source of basic research on a variety of electoral prob­ lems, the Office of Federal Elections is in SELECTED REFERENCES a position to provide election officials, Carlson, Richard J., ed. Issues of Electoral Re­ form. New York: National Municipal League, legislators, and interested citizens with 1973. sorely needed information on the com­ The Council of State Governments. Modernizing plexities of our 50 election systems. Election Systems. Lexington, Kentucky, 1973. Kimball, Penn. The Disconnected. New York: Co­ lumbia University Press, 197?. ADDITIONAL CHANGES League of Women Voters Education Fund. Ad­ Wyoming completely revised its elec­ ministrative Obstacles to Voting. Washington, tion code to provide that all state, county, D.C., 1972. National Municipal League. A Model Election municipal, and school elections will be System. New York, 1973. held at the same time as national elec­ Office of Federal Elections, United States General tions. With the exception of school elec­ Accounting Office. A Study of Election Difficul­ tions, all candidates will be nominated at ties in Representative American Jurisdictions: the primary in August and elected in Final Report. Washington, D.C., January 1973. Smolka, Richard G. The Costs of Administering November of even-numbered years. American Elections. New York: National Mu­ School board members will be nominated nicipal League, 1973. CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS 31 PRIMARY ELECTIONS FOR STATE OFFICERS

General provisions Dates of 1974 primaries for officers Voters receive ^ elected by statewide vote (a) ballots of Nomination A A of candidates r State or Primary Runoff primary ~\ elected by • All parties other jurisdiction 1974 1974 participating One party statewide vote* Alabama May 7 June 4 • C.P(b) Alaska Aug. 27 None •(c) P Arizona Sept. 10 None • P Arkansas May 28 June 11 '•k P California June 4 None • P Colorado. . ..' Sept. 10 None • X(d) Connecticut (e) None • CX(e) Delaware Sept. 7 None • CX(e) Florida Sept. 10~ Oct. 1 • P Georgia'. Aug. 13 Sept. 3 • C.P(b) Hawaii Oct. 5 None • P Idaho Aug. 6 None • P Illinois... March 19 None • CP(f) Indiana May 7 None • C,P(g) Iowa. June 4 None • .CX(h) Kansas Aug. 6 None • P Kentucky May 28 None • P (1975) May 27 None Louisiana Aug. 17 Sept. 28 • P Maine June 11 None • P Maryland Sept. 10 None • P Massachusetts Sept. 10 None • P Michigan Aug. 6 None •6) CPG) Minnesota Sept. 10 None •(i) P Mississippi June 4 June 25 • P (1975) June 3 (1975) June 24 Missouri Aug. 6 None • P Montana June 4 None • (1) P Nebraska May 14 None • P Nevada Sept. 3 r^one • P New Hampshire Sept. 10 • None • P New Jersey June 4 None •(1) P (1975) June 3 None New Mexico June 4 None • P New York Sept. 10 (k) None • CC.P(l) North Carolina May 7 June 4 • P North Dakota Sept. 3 None •(i) P Ohio May 7 None • P Oklahoma Aug. 27 Sept. 17 • P Oregon May 28 None • P Pennsylvania May 21 None • P Rhode Island Sept. 10 None • P South Carolina June 11 (rr.) • C.P(b) South Dakota June 4 None • CX(h) Tennessee Aug. 1 None • p Texas May 4 June 1 • p, Utah Sept. 10 None •0) X(d) Vermont Sept. 10 None • p Virginia June 11 None • CP(b) (1975) June 10 None Washington Sept. 17 None •(c) P West Virginia May 14 None • P March 5 (n ) Wisconsin Sept. 10 None •d) P Wyoming Aug. 20 None • P District of Columbia... May 7 , (0) • P Guam Sept. 7 (P) • ' P Puerto Rico (q) (q) • C Virgin Islands Sept. 10 None • P •Abbreviations: C—Convention; P—Direct primary; CP— (g) Candidates elected by statewide vote are nominated in Some candidates in convention, some in direct primary; X— convention, e.g.. Governors and U.S. Senators. Combination of convention and direct primary; CX—Some can­ (h) If for any office no candidate receives 35 percent of votes didates in convention, some combination of direct primary and cast at the primary, a convention is held to select a candidate. convention; CC,P—State Central Committees or direct pri­ mary; N.A.—Not Available. (i) Party column ballot; voter is restricted to marking one (a) Primaries for statewide offices in 1975 include 1975 before column only. Montana has one ballot for each party; voter is the date. restricted to marking one ballot only. (b) The party officials may choose whether they wish to (j) The Governor is the only state officer nominated by nominate candidates in convention or by primary elections. primary election. Usually the Democratic party nominates in primary and the (k) Set by 1974 Legislature. Republican party in convention. Georgia rarely uses conven­ (I) Candidates for statewide offices.are designated by State tions. In South Carolina no convention shall make nominations Central Committees. Anyone receiving 25 percent of the votes for candidates for office unless the decision to use the convention of a committee may require that a primary be held. Primaries method is reached by a % vote of the total membership, except may also be required by candidates who secure 20,000 signatures the office of State Senator. on petitions. (c) May vote in the primary of more than one party. (m) First runoff held two weeks after primary; second runoff (d) Preprimary endorsing assemblies are held in Colorado held two weeks after that if necessary. and preprimary conventions are held in Utah. If one candidate in Utah receives 70 percent of the delegate vote he is certified (n) Primaries for Supreme Court justices held when there are the candidate and is not required to run in the primary. three or more candidates. (e) A postconvention primary can be held if convention (o) Runoff primaries shall be held not less than two weeks nor action is contested by a candidate receiving a specified minimum niore than six weeks after primary. ercentage of the convention vote: Connecticut, 20 percent; (p) Runoff primaries shall be held within 15 days after E•elaware, 35 percent. primary. (f) Trustees of the University of Illinois are the only state (q) Primaries are not mandatory unless the party regulations officers nominated In convention. ''' require them. 32 THE BOOK OF THE STATES GENERAL ELECTIONS IN 1974 AND 1975 Including All Elections for State Officers with Statewide Jurisdiction*

State U.S. Congress: Date of Legislatures: (b) Members to be general Members to be elected elected State or elections State officers with statewide jurisdiction other jurisdiction in 1974 (a) to be elected Senate House Senate House

Alabama Nov. S Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, All All 1 7 Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor, 4 members State Board of Education, Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries, 2 Public Service Commissioners, 3 Associate Supreme Court Justices, 1 Court of Civil Appeals Judge, all Circuit Judge's Alaska Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor J^ All 11 Arizona Nov. S Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney All All 1 4 General, Treasurer, Supt. of Public Instruction, State Mine Inspector, 1 Corporation Commissioner, 1 Tax Commissioner, 1 Supreme Court Justice Arkansas..- Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, J^ All 1 4 Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor, Commissioner of State Lands, 1 Supreme Court Justice California. Nov. S Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, J^(c) All 1 43 Attorney General, Treasurer, Controller, Supt. of Public Instruction, Board of Equalization, Chief Justice, 3 Associate Justices of Supreme Court Colorado Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, Ji All 1 5 Attorney General, Treasurer, 3 Univ. of Colorado Regents, 1 State Board of Education Member Connecticut Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, AU All 1 6 Attorney General, Treasurer, Comptroller Delaware. Nov. 5 Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor of H(d) AU 0 1 Accounts, Insurance Commissioner Florida Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Attorney General, H All 1 15 Secretary of State, Treasurer, Comptroller, Commissioner of Education, Commissioner of Agriculture, 2 Public Service Commissioners, 3 or more Supreme Court Justices Georgia Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, All All 1 10 Attorney General, ^Comptroller General, State School Superintendent, Commissioner of Agriculture, Commissioner of Labor, 1 Public Service Commissioner, 3 Supreme Court Justices, 4 Court of Appeals Judges, 28 Superior Court Judges, 6 District Attorneys Hawaii Nov. S Governor, Lt. Governor, 11 State Board of All AU 1 2 Education Members Idaho Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Seeiretary of State, AU AU 1 2 Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor, Supt. of Public Instruction, 2 Supreme Court Justices(e) minols Nov. S Treasurer, 1 Supreme Court Judge H AU 1 24 Indiana Nov. 5 Secretary of State, Treasurer, Auditor H AU 1 11 Iowa.. }• Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, H AU 1 6 Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor, , Secretary of Agriculture, Supreme Court i Judge Kansas Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, None All 1 5 Attorney General, Treasurer, Insurance Commissioner, State Printer, 1 Supreme Court Justice Kentucky Nov. 5 1 Court of Appeals Judge None None 1 7 (1975) Nov. 4 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, }i All 0 0 Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor, Supt. of Public Instruction, Commissioner of Agriculture, 3 Railroad Commissioners, Clerk of Court of Appeals CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS GENERAL ELECTIONS IN 1974 AND 1975-Continued Including All Elections for State Officers with Statewide Jurisdiction*

State U.S. Congress: Date of Legislatures: (b) Members to be general Members to be elected elected Stale or elections State officers with statewide jurisdiction other jurisdiction in 1974 (a) to he elected Senate House Senate House

Louisiana Nov. 5 3 State Board of Education Members, 1 Public None None Service Commissioner, 1 Supreme Court Justice Maine Nov. 5 Governor AU AU 0 2 Maryland Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Attorney General, All All 1 8 Comptroller, 2 Court of Appeals Judges, 3 Court of Special Appeals Judges Massachusetts. .. . Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, All AU 0 12 Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor Michigan ' Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, All . All 0 19 Attorney General, 2 State Board of Education Members, 6 Trustees of State Universities, 2 Supreme Court Justices Minnesota Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State- None AU Attorney General, Treasurer, State Auditor, Chief Justice of Supreme Court, 5 Supreme Court Justices Mississippi Nov. 5 None None None (1975) Nov. 4 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, AU AU Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor, Supt. of Education, Land Commissioner, Commissioner of Agriculture, Insurance^ Commissioner, 3 Public Utilities Commissioners, 3 Highway Commissioners, 2 Supreme Court Justices, 1 Supreme Court Clerk Missouri Nov. 5 State Auditor AU Montana; Nov. S 2 Public Service Commissioners, Chief Justice All(f) AU of Supreme Court, 2 Associate Supreme; Court Justices Nebraska Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, H(d) (g) Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor, 4 State Board of Education Members, 4 Board of Regents Members, 2 Public Service Commissioners, 4 Supreme Court Justices Nevada Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, H AU Attorney General, Treasurer, Controller, 5 State Board of Education Members, 5 University Board of Regents Members, 1 Supreme Court Justice New Hampshire. .. Nov. 5 Governor, 5 Executive Councilors AU AU New Jersey Nov. 5 None None None (1975) Nov. 4 None AU AU New Mexico Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, AU Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor, Commissioner of Public Lands, 1 Corporation Commissioner, 1 Supreme Court Justice, 2 Court of Appeals Judges New York Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Attorney General, All All 1 39 Comptroller, 1 Court of Appeals Judge North Carolina..., Nov. 5 Chief Justice of Supreme Court, 2 Supreme AU AU 1 11 Court Justices, Superior Court Judge, Chief Judge, 5 Court of Appeals Judges North Dakota Nov. 5 Commissioner of Labor, 1 Public Service mc) AU 1 1 Commissioner, 2 Supreme Court Justices Ohio... Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, H(d) AU 1 23 Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor, 2 Supreme Court Justices Oklahoma Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, H AU 1 6 Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor, Supt. of Public Instruction, Commissioner of Labor, Commissioner of Insurance, Chief Mine Inspector, 1 Corporation Commissioner, Charities and Corrections Commissioner, State Examiner and Inspector, 3 Supreme Court Justices, 1 Court of Criminal Appeals Judge, 6 Court of Appeals Judges 34 THE BOOK OF THE STATES GENERAL ELECTIONS IN 1974 AND 1975-Concluded Including All Elections for State Officers with Statewide Jurisdiction *

State U.S. Congress: Date of Legislatures: (b) Members to he general Members to he elected elected State or elections State officers with statewide jurisdiction other jurisdiction in 1974 (a) to he elected Senate House Senate House Oregon Nov. 5 Governor, Supt. of Public Instruction, Labor J4 AU Commissioner, 2 Supreme Court Judges Pennsylvania Nov. S Governor, Lt. Governor All 25 Rhode Island Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, All All 2 Attorney General, General Treasurer South Carolina. Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, None AU Attorney General, Treasurer, Comptroller General, Supt. of Education, Commissioner of Agriculture, Adjutant General South Dakota Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, AU AU Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor, Commissioner of Schools and Public Lands, 1 Public Utilities Commissioner Tennessee Nov. 5 Governor, 1 Public Service Commissioner, 5 J4(d) AU Supreme Court Judges, 9 Court of Appeals Judges, 7 Court of Criminal Appeals Judges Texas .. Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor, Attorney General, AU Treasurer, Comptroller of Public Accounts, Commissioner of Agriculture, Commissioner of General Land Office, 1 Railroad Commissioner, 3 Supreme Court Justices, 2 Court of Criminal Appeals Judges Utah Nov. 5 5 Board of Education Members, 1 Supreme H AU 1 2 Court Justice Vermont Nov. S Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, AU AU 1 1 Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor Virginia Nov. 5 None None None 0 10 None AU AU 0 0 (1975) Nov. 4 Washington Nov. 5 4 Supreme Court Justices, 4 Court of Appeals H(d) AU 1 7 Judges West Virginia Nov. 5 None H Au" 0 4 Wisconsin Apr. 2 1 Supreme Court Justice Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, ji(dy Ali i' V Nov. 5 Attorney General, Treasurer (1975) Apr. 1 1 Supreme Court Justice Governor, Secretary of State, Treasurer, Auditor, H AU Wyoming Nov. 5 Supt. of Public Instruction American Samoa.. Nov. 5 None None AU 0 0 Guam Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor AU (g) 0 1(h) Puerto Rico Nov. 5(i) None None None 0 0 Virgin Islands Nov. 5 Governor, Lt. Governor AU (g) 0 1(h)

*In several States either some or all elected oflScials with declared the winner and does not run in the general eleciio.n. statewide jurisdiction do not appear.in the table as their terms If there are more than two candidates and none receives a are such that no elections for them occur in 1974 or 1975. majority, the two candidates receiving the most votes run in (a) Elections in 1975 are indicated by "1975" before the date. the general election. (b) For numbers, terms and party aflfjliations of state legisla­ (f) New apportionment law applicable in 1974 will require all tors see table on page 68. Senators to be elected, H for 2-year terms and H for 4-year (c) Reapportionment by Supremt; Court and by the Legis­ terms. lature may require all Senators to be elected in 1974. North (g) Unicameral Legislature. Dakota by referendum. (h) Non-voting delegate to U.S. House of Representatives. (d) Approximately. (i) Election day will be the first Tuesday of November every (e) The vote for Supreme Court Justice is usually decided at four years, but the Legislature has the right to change the date the primary elections- If one or two candidates run in the by amending the electoral law. primary, the candidate who receives a majority of votes cast is CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS 35 USE OF VOTING DEVICES*

Statewide Used in Type of equipment used State or other use majority of Used in some , '^ \ Straight jurisdiction required voting areas voting areas Mechanical Card punch Optical scanning party vote^

Alabama.. • Alaska • Arizona... • • Arkansas. . California. • • Colorado • •(a) Connecticut. ic • • Delaware ilr • • Florida •(b) Georgia • •(c) Hawaii • Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa

Kansas Kentucky •*• Louisiana ir Maine. .; Maryland -k Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana • Nebraska • Nevada New Hampshire. • New Jersey •(b) New Mexico ir • New York North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania. . . • Rhode Island... • South Carolina. • South Dakota. •k r Tennessee. . . . • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia •(d) • Washington... • West Virginia. • • (b) Wisconsin. . . . •(e) • Wyoming • District of Columbia •

' 'Mechanical, punch card, or optical scanning vote-counting (c) Except in presidential elections where candidates for the devices are not used in American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, office of presidential electors are on a separate straight party TTPI. and the Virgin Islands. The use of voting machines was Ucket. authorized.by the 1971 Utah Legislature but are not yet in use.. (d) All precincts having 500 or more registered voters by tThe ballot allows the citizen to vote for all candidates of the October 1, 1976, must have voting machines. same party by marking one box or lever. (e) Mandatory for municipalities of 10,000 or more iiopula- (a) Used in absentee voting only. tion; optional for smaller communities. (b) Other systems have been authorized but are not now in use. ' 36 THE BOOK OF THE STATES POLLING HOURS: GENERAL ELECTIONS

State or other jurisdiction Polls open Polls close Notes on hours

8 a.m. 5 p.m. 8 a.m. 6 p.m. If voting machines are not used and if coun­ ties are less than 400,000 in population. 8 a.m. 7 p.m. If voting machines are used and in counties of 400,000 or more. 8 a.m. 8 p.m. 6 a.m. 7 p.m. 8 a.m. 7:30 p.m. . 7 a.m. 8 p.m. Charter cities may set different hours for municipal elections. . 7 a.m. 7 p.m. Connecticut 6 a.m. 8 p.m. Delaware 7 a.m. 8 p.m. Florida 7 a.m. 7 p.m. Georgia . 7 a.m. 7 p.m. 7 a.m. 6 p^m. Idaho 8 a.m. 8 pfm. Polls close 8 p.m. or earlier when all regis­ tered electors of the precinct have ap­ peared and voted. County clerk has option of opening polls at 7 a.m. Illinois 6 a.m. 6 p.m. Indiana 6 a.m. 6 p.m. . 7 a.m. 8 p.m. 7 a.m. 7 p.m. Hours may be changed by election authori­ ties, but polls must be kept open at least 12 consecutive hours between 6 a.m. and 8 p.m. 6 a.m. 6 p.m. 6 a.m. 8 p.m. Persons within barriers or enclosures of buildings are entitled to vote, but no vote shall be cast after 12:00 midnight. Between 6 a.m . &10ia.m . 8 p.m. The municipal officers of each municipality shall determine the time of opening the polls between the times given. As above 9 p.m. In ^precincts using voting machines. 7 a.m. 8 p.m. Massachusetts... May open as earl y as 5:45 8 p.m. In cities, the polls shall be kept open at a.m.; must be opened least 10 hours. by 10 a.m. . 7 a.m. 8 p.m. . 7 a.m. 8 p.m. Municipalities of less than 1,000 may establish hours of 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. Mississippi 7 a.m. 6 p.m. Missouri 6 a.m. 7 p.m. 8 a.m. 1 p.m. 8 p.m. or earlier when all In precincts of less than 100 registered registered in precinct voters. have voted. 8 a.m. 8 p.m. 7 a.m. 7 p.m. Clark, Washoe and Carson City Counties. 8 a.m; 6 p.m. Other counties. New Hampshire.. . Varies Varies Cities: Polls open not less than 4 hours and may be opened not earlier than 6 a.m. nor later than 8 p.m. Small towns: In towns of less than 700 population the polls shall be open not less than 5 consecutive hours. On written re­ quest of 7 registered voters Jhe polls shall be kept open until 6 p.m. lii towns of less than 100 population, the polls shall close if all on the checklist have voted. Other towns: Polls shall open not later than 10 a.m. and close not earlier than 6 p.m. On written request of 10 registered voters the polls shall be kept open until 7 p.m. New Jersey 7 a.m. 8 p.m.' New Mexico 8 a.m. 7 p.m. New York 6 a.m. 9 p.m. North Carolina 6:30 a.m. 7:30 p.m. In voting precincts where voting machines are used, county board of elections may permit closing at 8:30 p.m. North Dakota Between 7 a.m. & 9 a.m. Between 7 p.m. & 8 p.m. Ohio 6:30 a.m. 6:30 p.m. CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS 37 POLLING HOURS: GENERAL ELECTIONS-Concluded

State or other jurisdiction Polls open Polls close Notes on hours

Oklahoma 7 a.m. 7 p.m. Upon written request of 3 or more electors . : in a precinct, the county election board is authorized to order polls opened at 6 a.m. Oregon 8 a.m. 8 p.m. Pennsylvania 7 a.m. 8 p.m. •• Rhode Island Between 7:00 a.m. and 9 p.m. 12:00 noon South Carolina. . . 8 a.m. 7 p.m. South Dakota 8 a.m. 7 p.m.- Polls must be open minimum of 10 and maximum of 12 continuous hours. Polls close at 7 p.m. except in Eastern Time Tennessee Varies Varies Zone where they close at 8 p.m. In counties having less than 100,000 the polls may be opened at 8 a.m. Texas 7 a.m. 7 p.m. In counties of more than one million popu­ lation the polls may be opened at 6 a.m. Polls must be opened at least 9 hours dur­ Utah 7 a.m. 8 p.m. ing the day. Vermont Not earlier than 6 a.m. Not later than 7 p.m. Virginia 6 a.m. 7 p.m. Washington '7 a.m. 8 p.m. West Virginia 6:30 a.m. 7:30 p.m. 1st, 2nd and 3rd class cities. Wisconsin 7 a.m. 8 p.m. 4th clasa'Cities, villages and towns. Open­ 9 a.m. 8 p.m. ing hours extendible by governing body to not earlier than 7 a.m. Wyoming 8 a.m. 7 p.m. Dlst. of Columbia. 7 a.m. 8 p.m. American Samoa.. Hours set by election commissioner. Guam 8 a.m. 8 p.m. Puerto Rico 9 a.m. 2 p.m. The polls are open between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m. for identification purposes only. Voters must be inside voting place by 2 p.m., when the voting begins. TTPI 7 a.m. 7 p.m. Virgin Islands 8 a.m. 6 p.m. 38 THE BOOK OF THE STATES QUALIFICATIONS FOR VOTING

Registration

Minimum resi- Cancellation for State or other dence requirements Permanent Closing date failure to vote Covers all jurisdiction (.days) (all areas) (days) (years) elections

Alabama 30 * None .. -k Alaska 30 • 30 4 • Arizona SO • 50 2 -jlr Arkansas 30 ir 20 4 ir California 30 • 30 2 • Colorado 32 • 32 2 • Connecticut None -jlr (a) ir Delaware None -^ (b) 4 •ir Florida 60 • 30 • Georgia None • SO(c) 3 * Hawaii None • 30PE;26GE 2 • Idaho None • 2 8 (d) Illinois 30D • 28 4 • Indiana 60T;30P • 29 2 • Iowa None (e) (f) 4 -k

Kansas 20 • 20 .. •*• Kentucky 30 • 30 4 * Louisiana None -jlr 30 4 ir Maine l-9(g) • 1-9 .. • Maryland 30 • (h) 5 (d)

Massachusetts None * 31S;20L -k Michigan 45 • (i) .. • Minnesota .20 • 20(j) 4 (k) Mississippi 30 -K 30 • Missouri ,,.; v„ 30 • (1) ••

Montana 30 , • 30F;40 4 • Nebraska - Npne ' • • ir (m) * Nevada 30S;10P- • (n) 2(o) • New Hampshire...; .30 ir 10 •*• New Jersey... ;.." .. iO ir 40 4 ir

New Mexico.; 30 • 30 2 •^ New York ,..• .30 ' . •. . ir 28 2 (k) North Carolina. .30 • 21 8 • North Dakota 30 None Ohio . ' 30. .. (p) 30;ll(q) 2 •

Oklahoma . None • . • 7;10(r) 4 Ik- Oregon None: .• . 30 .. • Pennsylvania 30 . • 30 2 •*• Rhode Island 30 • 30 5 • South Carolina None . . (s) . 30 2 ^ •

South Dakota . None ' ! .ir 15 4 •*• Tennessee SO ' • 30 4 * Texas 30- .• 30 3 • Utah None • 10 4 • Vermont . None ir (t) .. ir

Virginia. None • 30 4(u) • Washington None ir 30 (v) * West Virginia 30 • 30 4 •(w) Wisconsin 10 (x) (y) 4 • Wyoming None • 30 2 • District of Columbia None ' • 30 .4 ir American Samoa 2yrs.S;lyr.P (z) 14 .. (z) Guam None • IS .2 • Puerto Rico N.A. • N.A. N.A. • TTPI N.A. •. N.A. . • Virgin Islands lyr.S;60D • 30 4 • :.•. • Note: All States require United States citizenship and a (j) Voter may also register on election day. ':•: minimum voting age of 18. No State has property qualifications (k) All except school eleictlons; New York, all except special for voting in a general election. All literacy tests were suspended district, until 1975 by the Federal Voting Rights Act of 1970. (1) Fourth Wednesday before election. Symbols: F—Federal; S—State; D—District; T—Township; (m) Second Friday before election. P—Precinct; L—Local; PE—Primary Election; GE—General (n) Fifth Saturday before election. Election; N.A.—Not available. (o) Voting twice consecutively by absentee ballot. (a) Sa.turday of the fourth week before election unless ISor (p) In cities of 16,000 or more; county board of elections has citizen after that date. the option to require registration in all or part of county. fb) Third Saturday in October in even-numbered years. (q) Special election held on a day other than a primary or gen- (c) A citizen unregistered by the SOth day may register at eral election day. least 14 days before federal election and vote for President and (r) Oklahoma County only. Vice President. A citizen unregistered before the SOth day who (s) All electors must reregister every 10 years. moved from one county to another may register at least 14 days (t) Local election board determines the number of days before before state elections and vote for Governor "and Lieutenant an election that one can be put on checklist. Governor. (u) Effective December 31, 1974. (d) Registration covers national and state elections. Muncipal (v) Thirty months prior to April 1 of each odd-numbered year, registration is separate. (w) In order for permanent registration to be applicable for (e) All cities over 10,000 population; all counties over 50,000 municipal registration, the municipality must pass an ordinance population. Effective January 1, 197S, permanent all areas. implementing the state law and integrating the city registration (f) Tenth day before election. with the state law. (g) From one municipality to another within the State, three (x) In municipalities with population of over 5,000; under months. 5,000 by local option. (h) Fifth Monday before election. (y) Second Wednesday before election. (f) Fifth Friday before election. (z) A new registration is made before any election. CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS 39 VOTING STATISTICS ON PERSONS REGISTERED AND VOTING, BY STATE, IN GUBERNATORIAL ELECTIONS, 1972*

Registered Numbers voting for Governor—primary Numbers voting for Governor—general election prior to , '^ , ,. '^ —^ ^ State or general Repub- Demo- ^ Repub- Demo- . other jurisdiction election licans crats Total licans crats Other Total

Alabamaf 1.625,912 (a) 1,019,680 1,019.680 (b) 637,046 217.906 854,952 Alaskat 104,642 35,844 35.323 ' 71,167 37,264 42,309 . 1.206 80,779 Arizonat 618.411 77.259 121.749 199.008 209.356 202.053 ... 411,409 Arkansas..." 959,871 (a) 494.851 494.851 159.177 488,892 ... 648,069 Callfornlat 8,706,347 1.906,568 2.502,861 4.442,108(c) 3.439.664 2.938.607 131.801 6.510.072 Coloradot 968,982 104,642 103.239 207.881 350.690 302.432 15.374 668.496 Connectlcutt 1.338,184 131,595 (a) 131,595 582,160 500.561 76 1,082,797 Delaware 292,652 44,067 (a) -44.067 109.583 117.274 1,865 228.722 Florldat 2.797.000 352.270(d) 775.063(d) 1.127.333(d) 746,243 984.305 265 1.730,813 Georgiat 1.961.013 107.555 798.660 906,215 424,983 620,419 1,261 1,046,663 Hawallf.. 291,681 41.803 154.882 196.685 101.249 137.812 239,061 Idahot • 364.992 80,058 63,069 143,127 117,108 128,004 ... 245.112 lUlnola 6.215,331 585,376 1.430,093 2.015.469 2,293.809 2.371,303 13,931 4.679,043 Indiana 3,018.578 (a) (a) (a) 1,203,903 965,489 16.455 2.185.847 Iowa 739,906 189,699 149,091 339,460(c) 707,177 487.282 15,763(c) 1.211.222 Kansas 1.101.679(e) 297.939 149,950 447,889 341,440 571,256 9,486 922.182 Kentucky! 1,461,435 100,945 448,667 549.612 412.653 470.720 47.417 930,790 Louisiana 1,667.143 10,571 l,174,043(d) l,184,614(d) 480,424 641,146 ... 1,121,570 Malnef •... . 522,044 81,658 52,308 133.966 162.248 163.138 ... 325,386 Marylandt 1,596.916 124,525 465.070 589.595 314.336 639,579 19,184 973,099 Massachusettst 2,684.636 207,107 703,105 910,212 1.058,623 799,269 10,014 1.867.906 Mlchigant 3.969,807 535.631 562.562 1.098.193 1.338,711 1.294.600 21,982 2,655.293 Mlnnesotaf (f) 240.694 352.867 593,561 621,780 737,921 4,781 1,364,482 Mississippi^ 1.100,000(f) (a) 762,987(d) 762.987(d) (b) 601,222 179,415 780,637 Missouri... (f) 649,893 353,298 998,623(c) 1,029.451 "832.751 3.481 1.865.683 Montana 386.867 97.304 126,794 224,098 146.231 172.523 ... 318,754 Nebraskat 707.558 193,256 122.950 316,206 201,994 248,552 11,073 461,619 Nevadat 192,933 36,212 59,889 96.101 64.400 70,697 11,894 146,991 New Hampshire 449,714 43,611 29.326 72.937 133.702 126,107 63.293 323,102 NewJer8ey§ 3,541,809 381,719 456,410 838,127 676,235 1,397,613 31,161 2.105,009 NewMexlcot 406,275 56,278 128,159 184,437 134,640 148,835 6,889 290,364 NewYorkf 7,930.798 (a) 944,988 944,998 3,105.220 2,158,355 749,286 6,012,861 North Carolina 2,357,645 170.583 808,105 979,274(c)' 767,470 729.104 8,211 1,504,785 North Dakota (g) 97,422 32,210 129,632 138.032 143.899 ... 281,931 Ohiof..' 3,879,300(0 928,131 927.572 1.855,703 1.382,749 1,752,560 75,914 3,211,223 Oklahomat 1.162.527 (a) 402.283 402,238 336,157 338,338 24,295 698.790 Oregont 955,459 246,517 277,339 523,856 369.964 293.892' 2.538 666,394 Pennsylvaniat 5,419,551 730,170 1,056,298 1,786,468 2.680.411 2.627.130 104.941 5.412.482 Rhode Island 531.847 (a) (a) (a) 194,315 216,953 1.597 412,865 South Carolinat . 802,587 (a) 254,889 254.889 221,2,33. 250.551 13.073. 484,857 South Dakota 392,256 (a) (a) (a) 123.165 185.012 ... 308.177 Tennesseet 1.709.433 244.999 590,109 835,108 575,777: 509,521 22,949 1.108.247 Texas 5,212.815(e) 114.007 2.192,903 2.306.910 1,533.986 1,633,493 242,022 3,409,501 Utah....." 621,014 (a) (a) (a) 144,449,' 331.998 . . . 476,447 Vermont 273,056 61.225 10.552 71.777 82,491 101i7Sl 4.957 189.199_ Vlrglnia§ 2.039,630 (a) (b) (a) 525,075 (b) 510,420(c) 1.035,495 Washington 1,973,895 331,235 580.848 912,083 747,825 630,613 94,104 "1.472,542 West Virginia...... 1.062,519 155,890 364,003 519,893 423,817 350,462 ... 774.279 Wlsconslnt 1,255.075(0 222.595 292,745 S18.069(c) 602.617 728,403 11,838 1.342,858 Wyomlngt 134,875 44,284 33,914 78.198 74.249 44.008 .... 118,257 Guamf 23,483 17.494 N.A. 17.494 N.A. N.A. N.A. 20,720 Puerto Rlico 1.555,504 (a) (a) (a) 563,609(h) 658,856(i) 69,654(j) 1,292,119 Virgin Islandsf N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. NrA. N.A. N.A. N.A. •Figures are for-1972 except where indicated: tl970; 11971; (d) Figures shown are for first primary. Second primary— 81973. Florida: Republicans. 358.997; Democrats. 759.183; total, N.A.—Not avaitab)e. 1,118,180. Louisiana: Democrats only 1,164,036; Mississippi: (a) No primary held. Alabama. Arkansas. Connecticut, Dela- Democrats only 719.188. ware, Indiana. Mississippi. South Carolina, Virginia, Puerto (e) Figures from survey, January 1973. Rico: candidates nominated in party convention; New York, (f) Registration required. Ohio, Wisconsin: in cities and Oklahoma: candidates nominated without opposition; Rhode counties over a specified size; Mississippi: no central records Island. South Dakota. Utah: no primary unless contest for office. maintained; Minnesota. Missouri: in cities and counties over a (b) No candidate. specified size, no central records maintained. (c) Includes scattered votes. California: 32,679: Iowa: pri- (g) Registration not required, mary, American Party, 670, General Election. 48; Missouri: (h) New Progressive Party, non-partisan candidate, 1.093: North Carolina: American Party. (i) Popular Democratic Party. 586; Virginia: write-in, 317; Wisconsin: American Party, 2,729. (j) Puerto Rican Independence Party. CONSTITUTIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FOR ELECTION TO STATE OFFICE

Legislature Governor and Lieutenant Governor A State State District » citizen resident Age State, resident resident, U.S. citizen, Bouse b" State Age number of yrs. Number oj f yrs. Other House Senate Bouse Senate Senate Other 30 10 7 21 25 3 3 1 30 7 "i (a) 21 25 3 3 1 (a) 25 10 5 25 25 3 3 1 (b) 30 (c) "i 21 25 2 2 1 (b) 5 (a) 3 3 1 (a. b) S Colorado 30 (c) 25 25 1 (b) 30 2 (a) 21 21 (d) (a) 30 iV o 24 27 "'3 "3 1 Florida 30 "6 21 21 2 2 (d) (bj 30 IS 6 7 21 25 2 4 1 (b) 30 5 (a) Age of majority 3 3 (a) Idaho 30 •(c) 2 "1 (a. b) minois 25 (c) 3 '21 '21 2 (b) 30 5 5 21 25 "2 "2 1 (b) Iowa 30 (c) 2 21 25 1 1 60 days (b) (d) (a) 30 "6 "'6 '24 30 "2 "6 1 (f) 30 10 10 -5" ... 25 2 (a. f) , - 30 15 5 (g) 21 25 1 1 3 mo. (b) 30 (h) 21 25 3 3 1 (f) 7 5 (d) Michigan 30 (h) '21' 21' 1" (d) (a.' i) Minnesota 25 •(c) V "1 4 6 mo. (a) 30 20 5 '21 '25' 4 3 2 (a) 30 15 10 24 30 2 1 (a) 25 (c) 2 1 1 .6 mo. 30 (c) 5 1 (a) 25 "s 2 (a) (a) 30 7 '30' "2 "7 (d) 30 20 7 21 30 2(f) 4(f) 1 (a)

30 (c) 5 21 25 "5" (d) 30 (c) 5 "s 2 1 (b) 30 2 '. 25 (a) 5 2 1 North Dakota 30 5 (a) 21 25 "2 1 (d) (a) Ohio (e) (c) (a) 1 (d) 31 (c) 21 25 (d) (a, i) 30 c) "3 (h) 21 21 1 (b) 30 (c) 7 21 25 • •4(f) • •4(f) 1 (a) (a.'j) 30 "s "5" '21' "25 (a) "s South Dakota. 30 (c) 2 (a) 25 25 2 (a) Tennessee (k). . 30 (c) 7 21 30 3 3 1 (b) Texas 30 (c) 5 21 26 2 5 1 (a. b) Utaht 30 5 5 (a) 25 3 3 1 (a. b) Vermont 4 30 2 (d) Virginia 30 (c) 5 (h) 21 21 (d) Washington..., (c) (a) (a.b) West Virginlat. 30 5 25 5 5 1 (a. j) rf». Wisconsin (c) (a) 1 (a) —' Wyomlngt.... 30 (c) 5 (a) 21 25 1 (b. f) This table was developed by the Council of State Governments from materials carried in (f) Citizen of State. Louisiana: 5 years. previous publications and state constitutions. (g) Governor must be resident of the State during the term for which he is elected. t The State does not provide for Office of Lieutenant Governor. (h) Must be qualified voter: Maryland, 5 years; Michigan, 4 years; Oklahoma, 10 years; (a) Must be a qualified voter, Virginia, 5 years. (b). U.S. citizen. Maine: 5 years. (i) No person convicted of a felony for breach of public trust ^thin preceding 20 years or (c) Number of years not specified. convicted for subversion shall be eligible. (d) Reside in district, no time limit. Massachusetts: House, 1 year; Vermont: House, 1 year. (j) No bribery convictions. (e) Kansas and Ohio have no constitutional qualifications for the office of Governor: how­ (k) Office of Lieutenant Governor was created by statute. He is chosen by members of ever, they provide that no member of Congress or other person holding a state or federal Senate of which he is a member and the office bears the title ofiSpeaker. The Speaker must office shall be Governor. reside one year immediately preening his election in the county or district he represents. LIMITATIONS ON CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES

Filing of campaign statements required Restrictions on expenditures Applies to Contributions prohibited Receipts Receipts Disburse- Disburse- , Total on State or other Elec­ Candi­ by by ments by ments by Required times for By cor­ By Restrictions on Total by behalf of jurisdiction (a) tions* dates^ parties candidates parties candidates filing statements porations unions amounts and sourcest Character candidate candidate Alabama. P. G 1.2,3,4.5 No Yes No Yes Within 15 days after Yes No Solicitation from state Yes Yes(b) No primary and 30 days employees and candi­ • after general election dates prohibited Arizona. P. G 1.2,3.4.5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Receipts and expendi­ Yes Yes No No tures within 10 days after primary, and with­ Yes(c) Yes(c) in 30 days aJFter gen­ eral or special election Arkansas. P. G 1.2,3,4,5 No No Yes(d) Political practice pledge No Solicitation from state before election; within employees prohibited 60 days after both pri­ No No mary and general elec­ tion California P. G(e) 1.2.3(f) Yes Yes Yes Yes Candidate and commit­ No No Anonymous contribu- No tee treasurer: 25th day tions of $100 or more No No and 7th day before are to be deposited in election; 38th day after the state general fund. election for candidate. No contribution of $500 Initiative-referendum: or more shall be made 3Sth day- after qualifi­ in cash cation or non-qualifica­ tion of a measure, 32nd day and 11th day before election, 4Sth day after election. No statement required unless total contributions are $500 or more Colorado. P. G 1.2.3.4.5 Yes Yes Yes Yes For a candidate within No No No No No No 10 days after primary and within 30 days af­ ter general or special election; for a commit­ tee within 30 days after general election only Connecticut. P. G 1,2.3.4,5 Yes YesCg) Yes Yes(g) Within 30 days after Yes No Contributions by i)er- Yes No No election son under an assumed name and solicitation of candidates prohib­ ited Florida. P. G(e) 1.2.3.4. Yes Yes Yes Yes Candidate and commit­ No No Limit of: $3,000 contri- Yes Yes Yes S(f) tee treasurers: 1st Mon. bution from any one of each calendar quar­ person for statewide of­ ter until 40th day be­ fice and $2,000 for con­ fore election. After 40th gressional office, $1,000 day, Mon. of each week legislative or local can­ before, and 5th day be­ didate fore. Final report 45 days after last election in election year, 30 days later and 60 days there­ after untU account bal­ ances "0" Georgia P. G 1.2.3,4.5 No No No No None No No No No No No Hawaii P. G 1.2.3.4,5 Yes Yea YeaCh) Yes Within 20 days after No No Anonymous contribu­ No(i) No(i) No(i) primary if loser; if win­ tions prohibited ner then 20 days after general election No No No None No Solicitation from cer­ No No No lUlnols P. G 1.2.3,4.5 No a) tain classes of state em­ ployees prohibited if done during worlting hours Yes Yea Yes Within 45 days after Yea Yea Solicitation from state Yes Yes Yea Indiana P, G 1.2.3,4,5 Yea election employees and candi­ dates and contributions under assumed name prohibited Yea Yes Yea Candidates. political Yes No(k) Solicitation from state No Yea No Iowa P. G 1.2,3.4,5 Yes committee: 20th day employees prohibited of Jan., May, July and October Kansas P, G 1,2,3 Yea~, Yea Yes Yes 30 days after election. 0) No No Yes Yes No December 31 for parties Kentucky P, G 1,2,3.4,5 Yes Yes Yes Yea Candidates for state of- Yes No Solicitation from .state No No No fice: 30 days and 10 employees and anony­ days prior to election mous contributions pro­ and 30 days after; can­ hibited didates for local office: 10 days before and 30 days after; parties: 30 days after primary and • general elections Louisiana P. G 1.2,3,4,5 No No No No None Yea No Solicitation from cer­ No No No tain state and city em­ ployees prohibited Maine P, G 1,2,3.4.5 Yea Yes Yea Yes Report within 45 days No No Contributions by per­ Yea Yea Yes after election sons under a fictitious name prohibited Maryland P. G 1,2,3,4,5 Yes Yes Yes(h) Yes 7 days preceding an No No Limit of $2,500 contri­ Yes Yes(m) Yea election and a number bution by any one of times following an source not a candidate election in any election and con­ tributions under ficti­ tious name prohibited Massachusetts... P. G 1,2,3,4,5 Yes Yea Yea Yea Candidate and com­ Yes No Individual contribu­ Yes Yea Yes mittee: 10th day of tions during year are March, June, Sept.. limited to $3,000 to one 1 Sth and 5th days be­ candidate, $3,000 to fore election and 30 one party, and $3,000 to days after primary and nonelected political general elections; de­ committees not orga­ pository -the Sth and nized in behalf of any 20th of each month candidate. Solicitations from public officers or employees and candi­ dates and contribu­ tions under fictitious name prohibited LIMITATIONS ON CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES—Continued

Filing of campaign statements required Restrictions on expenditures Applies to Contributions prohibited A Receipts Receipts Disburse- Disburse- Total on State or other Elec­ Candi­ by by ments by ments by , Required times for By cor­ By Restrictions cm Total by behalf of jurisdiction tions* dates^ parties candidates parties candidates filing statements porations unions amounts and sourcest Character candidate candidate Michigan. P. G 1.2.3,4.5 Yes Yes Yes Yes 10 days after primary Yes No Contributions may not Yes Yes Yes election caucus or con­ be received from an vention; 20 days after anonymous source and general election solicitation from candi­ dates prohibited Minnesota..... P, G 1.2.3,4,5 Yes Yes Yes Yes 8 days before and with- Yes No Solicitation from can- Yes Yes Yes in 10 days following, didates prohibited primary; 8 days before and 10 days following general election Mississippi. P 1,2.3,4.5 No Yes No Yes Contribution state- No No Solicitation from can- No Yes No ments: by 5th day of didates illegal each month person is candidate. Expenditure reports: within 60 days of election Missouri P. G 1.2.3.4.5 Yes No Yes Yes Within 30 days after Yes No Solicitation from can- No Yes Yes election didates illegal Montana P, G 1,2,3,4,5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Candidates: within 15 Yes No Solicitation from state No Yes(n) Yes days after election; par­ employees and candi­ ties: within 10 days af­ dates and contribu­ ter election tions under fictitious name prohibited Nebraska P, G 1,2,4,5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Candidates: 15 and 5 No(o) No Individual contribu- Yes No No days before, 20 days tions are limited to after election; commit­ $1,000 to a treasurer of tees: 15 and 5 days be­ a comniittee for any fore, 20 days after elec­ one campaign tion Nevada P, G 2.3 No No No Yes 15 days after a primary No No No Yes Yes and 30 days after a gen­ eral election New Hampshire. P. G(p) 1.2.3,4,5 Yes Yes Yes Yes 1st statement 6 days Yes Yes Any partnership as Yes Yes(r) Yes before; 2nd, 10 days such or any partner after election (q) acting in behalf of such partnership; any per­ son employed in the classified service of the State; a personal con­ tribution in excess of $5,000 except by can­ didate himself; or a contribution if made anonymously, or in guise of a loan, or con­ cealed, or without knowledge of candidate or his agents or politi­ cal committee prohib­ ited ' New Jersey. P,G (e) 1,2,3,4, Yes (s) Yes (s) Yes (s) Yes(s) By campaign treasurers Yes (j) No Contribution by or so- Yes No (u) Yes (u) 5(f) of candidates, orgapi- licitation of any non- zations, and individ­ elected public officer or uals (t): 2Sth day and employee excepting 7 th day before election, those whose terms are 15th day after elec­ fixed by law is forbid­ tion, and every 60 days den. Anonymous, pseu- • thereafter until final dononymous, or other­ accounting. By deposi­ wise disguised contri­ tories: 15th day after butions forbidden election New Mexico P, G 1,2,3,4,5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Candidates: within 10 No No No money of political No No No days after election; par­ party may be spent on ties: within 30 days behalf of primary can­ after election didate New York P. G 1,2,3,4. Yes Yes Yes Yea 1st report 10 days be- Yes No Contributions by own- No Yes Yes S(i) fore election; 2nd, 20 ers of polling places days after election; fi­ barred; solicitation nal Jan. 2 from candidates and state employees and contributions from per­ sons under fictitious names prohibited North Carolina. P. G 1,2,3,4,5 Yes Yes(v) Yes Yes(v) 1st report 10 days be- Yes No No No No No fore election; final, 20 days after election / North Dakota.. P, G 1,2,3,4,5 No No No No None Yes No Contribution made or Yes Yes Yes received'. under other than the donor's own name and solicitation from candidates pro­ hibited Ohio P, G 1,2,3,4,5 Yes Yes Yes Yes By 4:00 p.m. 45th day Yes No Solicitation from state Yes Yes No after election employees and candi­ dates prohibited Oklahoma.. P, G 1,2,3,4,5 Yes Yes Yea Yes Candidates: within 15 No Individual contribu- No days after any general tions eire limited to election; party cam­ $5,000 and those by No No paign committees: jiersons under a ficti­ within 15 days after tious name prohibited any general election Oregon. P. G 1,2,3,4,5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Not more than 10 and (1) No State employees may Yes not less than 7 days be­ not solicit contribu­ fore election tions during working Yes(n) Ye8(w) hours. Any payments in false name prohib­ ited Pennsylvania. P. G 1,2,3,4,5 Yes Yes Yea Yes 30 days after primary Yes Yes Contributions may not Yes and general elections be solicited from civil service employees and No No those employed by the " Game Commission. State Board of Voca­ tional Rehabilitation, and Board. of Parole or be given by persons under a fictitious name LIMITATIONS ON CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES—Concluded

Filing of campaign statements required Restrictions on expenditures Appi lies to Contributions prohibited Receipts Receipts Disburse- Disburse- A Total on State or other Elec­ Candi­ by ' by merits by ments by Required times for By cor­ By Restrictions on Total by behalf of Jurisdiction tions* dates] Parties candidates parties candidates filing statements porations unions amounts and sourcest Character candidate candidate South Carolina.. P. G 1,2,3,4.5 No No No Yes Before elections and af­ No No No Yes No No ter elections South Dakota... P, G 1.2,3,4,5 Yes No Yes Yes Within 30 days after Yes No No Yes Yes(x) Yes elections P. G' 1.2.3,4.5 No No Yea Yes Candidate's and man­ Yes No No No No No ager's statements: with­ in 30 days after elec­ tion P. G(e) Yes Yes Yes Yes 1st report not earlier Yes Yes Solicitation from em­ Yes No No(y) than 40th and not later ployees of certain govt'l. than 31st day; 2nd,not agencies prohibited. earlier than lOth and Contributions by per­ not later than 7th day sons holding a license before election; 3rd not to make, distribute, or later than 31st day af­ sell alcoholic beverages ter election. Further prohibited statements are required at specified intervals until final account ^ Utah P. G 1,2,3,4.5 Yea Yes Yes Yes lOth day of June. Yes No Solicitation from can­ Yes Ye8(2) Yes! July. August and Sep­ didates illegal tember Vermont P 1,4,5 No Yes No Yes Within 10 days after No No No Yes Yes Yes primary election Virginia P. G 1.2,3,4.5 No Yes No Yes Candidates' treasurers; No No No No No No no earlier than the 14th day and no later than the 7th day prior to election. 30 days after election or prior to tak­ ing oflSce, whichever is first; if any unpaid bills or deficits remain—60 days after election; if any unpaid bills or defi­ cits remain when 60 day report is filed—6 months after election; if any unpaid bills' or deficits remain when 6 month report is filed— 1 year after election Wasliington. P, G 1,2,3,4,5 Yes Yes Yes Yes 19th and Sth days be- No No Contributionsfrom out- No No No fore election; within 10 of-state political com­ ^ days after primary mittee unless contribu­ election. 21 days after tion reported to Public date of all other elec­ Disclosure Commission tions West VlrgiiUa. .. P. G 1.2.3.4.5 Yea Yes Yes Yea Not less than 7 nor Yea No Limitation on Individ- Yes No Yes more than IS days be­ ual contributions and fore, 30 days after all prohibition on solicit­ elections ing contributions from state employees and candidates Wisconsin. P. G 1.2,3.4.5 Yes Yes Yea Yes Candidates: Tues. pre­ Yes No Contributions by coop- Yes Yes Yes ceding election; par­ erative associations ties: Tues. sifter elec­ and solicitation from tion state employees and | candidates prohibited Wyoming P. G 1.2.3,4i5 Yea Yes Yes Yes Within 30 days after Yes No Solicitation from state Yes Yes(aa) Yes election employees prohibited Dlst.ofCk>lumbIa P. G 5 Yes Yes Yes ' Yes Within 30 days after No No Limit of $5,000 from No Yes No election any one person; no in­ dependent comniittee shall receive contribu- • . •• . . tions aggregating, more -.-- '• . • than $100,000 Guam P. G 2 Yes Yes Yea Yes Within 15 days after No No Solicitations from clas- Yes Yea Yes election sified civil service em­ ployees prohibited Puerto Rico G 1,2.3 Yes Yes Yes Yes Quarterly: within 30 Yes No Individual contribu- (ab) - No No days after expiration tions are restricted up of each quarter to the amount of $600 in an election year and $400 in other years •P—primary election; G—general election. be imposed for failure to comply. tThe following numbers are used as codes for the following offices: 1, statewide; 2, State (p) Excludes presidential preference and delegate primaries. Senator; 3, State Representative; 4, United States Senator; 5, United States Representative. (q) Candidates for State Senator or Representative to the General Court, Councilor or tThis column does not include procedural limitations such as prohibitions on making gifts county officers who have expended a sum in excess of $200 are required to file second statement directly to candidates shortly before elections. only (if not later than 2nd Friday after primary or election). (a) No limitation on campaign contributions and expenditures in Alaska. Delaware. Idaho. (r) Candidate's contribution to the state committee, his filing fee, personal travel and sub­ Rhode Island, American Samoa, TTPI, and Virgin Islands. sistence expenses, or services of his regular employees in discharging duties of a public office (b) Newspaper, television, and radio advertising exempt. are exempt. (c) Expenditures limited at primary election only, exclusive of money expended for sta­ (s) Also receipts and expenditures of political committees and political information or­ tionery, postage, printing, and advertisements in newspapers, motion pictures, radio and ganizations. television broadcasts, outdoor advertising signs, and necessary personal, traveling, or sub­ (t) The law requires that all money be channeled through a campaign treasurer; except sistence expenses. that an individual may spend his own money and, if the amount is over $100, file his own (d) Statements must contain all disbursements greater than $25. report. (e) Also to special, municipal, and school elections. (u) Fifty cents per voter voting at the last presidential election in district where candidate (f) Also to candidates for county, municipal, and school district offices, and to all public is running. Questions. (v) Only in primary election. (g) Only if candidate incurred personal expense; but if he is required to file, he must include (w) Congressional and statewide offices: IS cents times number of registered voters eligible everything including receipts. to vote. All others: 2S cents times registered voters or $1,000, whichever is greater, or media (h) By agent and/or committee acting on behalf of any candidate, expenditures. (i) Does not apply to candidates covered by the federal campaign expenditure statute, (x) Printing or circulation of written or printed matter exempted. (j) Illinois: by msurance corporations only; New Jersey: by public utilities, banks, and (y) Individuals acting alone may make direct expenditures of up to $100 in behalf of can­ insurance corporations. didates. (k) State statute prohibits contribution only if union is a corporation. (z) Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General. (1) Certain corporations only. (aa) Traveling expenses exempted. (m) Personal funds only. (ab) Act No. 11, 1957, created an electoral fund against which each principal political party (n) Expenditures of relatives and associates deemed to be those of candidate himself. in the Commonwealth can draw up to $7S,00() annually, or up to $150,000 in election years. (o) Contributions are not prohibited, but are required to be reported. Strict i>enalties can The act enumerates the character of the expenditures which can be paid from the fund. 48 THE BOOK OF THE STATES PROVISIONS FOR REFERENDUM ON STATE LEGISLATION

Referendum provisions ^Established by are also available to State or constitutional all or some local other jurisdiction provision Basis of referendum (a) Petition requirement (b) government units (c) ,

Alaska ir Petition of people 10% of votes cast in last general election for Governor and resident in at least H of election districts Arizona... ir Petition of people 5% of qualified voters Submitted by Legislature Arkansas if Petition of people 6% of votes cast In last general election • for Governor California •*• Petition of people (d) 5% of votes cast in last general election • Constitutional requirement for Governor Colorado •*• Petition of people 5% of votes cast in last general election • Submitted by Legislature for Secretary of State Florida... * Constitutional requirement Submitted by Legislature • Georgia •(e) Constitutional requirement Petition of people 10% of votes cast in last general election • Idaho • for Governor Submitted by Legislature • lUlnols • Constitutional requirement • Iowa -k Constitutional requirement Kansas if Petition of people (f) 5% of votes cast in last genersd election Kentucky if Constitutional requirement for Governor Maine • (e) Petition of people 10% of votes cast in last general election • Submitted by Legislature for Governor Constitutional requirement Maryland • (e) Petition of people 3% of votes cast in last general election • Submitted by Legislature for Governor Massachusetts.. if Petition of people 2% of votes cast in last general election • for Governor Michigan • Petition of people 5% of votes cast in last general election • Submitted by Legislature for Governor Constitutional requirement Missouri if Petition of people 5% of legal voters In each of % of con­ • Submitted by Legislature . gressional districts Montana if Petition of people 5% of total qualified electors and 5% in • Submitted by Legislature at least H of legislative districts Nebraska -A- Petition of people 5% of votes cast in last general election • for Governor Nevada if Petition of people 10% of votes in last general election • New Hampshire, if Submitted by Legislature Submitted by Legislature New Jersey if Constitutional requirement Petition of people 10% of votes cast in last general election New Mexico • Constitutional requirement for Governor Constitutional requirement New York • Submitted by Legislature North Carolina.. •*• Constitutional requirement North Dakota... • Petition of people 7,000 signatures Ohio • Petition of people 6% of electors Constitutional requirement Oklahoma • Petition of people 5% of votes cast for state office receiving Submitted by Legislature largest number of votes in last general Constitutional requirement election Oregon * Petition of people 5% of votes cast in last election for Submitted by Legislature Supreme Court justice Rhode Island... • Constitutional requirement

(a) Three forms of referendum exist: (1) Petition of people— States have a referendum process that is available only to local the people may petition for a referendum, usually with the units of government: Kansas, home rule cities; Minnesota, intention of repealing existing legislation; (2) Submitted by North, Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Vir­ Legislature—the Legislature may voluntarily submit laws to ginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming. the electorate for their approval; and (3) Constitutional require­ (d) Amendments or repeals of initiative statutes by another ment—the state constitution may require certain questions to statute must be submitted to the electorate for approval unless be submitted to the people, often debt authorization. the initiative statute provides to the contrary. (b) In each State where referendum may occur, a majority (e) The type of referendum held at the request of the Legisla­ of the popular vote is required to enact a measure. In Massa­ ture is not established by a constitutional provision. chusetts the measure must also be approved by at least 30 per­ (f) Applies only to referendum on legislation classifying prop­ cent of the ballots cast. erty and providing for differential taxation on same. (c) In addition to those listed in this column, the following CONSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS 49 PROVISIONS FOR REFERENDUM-Concluded

Referendum provisions Established by ^ are also available to State or constitutional all or some local other jurisdiction provision Basis of referendum (a) Petition requirement (b) government units (c)

South Carolina.. • Submitted by Legislature Constitutional requirement South Dakota... • Petition of people 5% of votes cast in last general election for Governor • Utah • Petition of people 10% of votes cast In last general election • for Governor Submitted by Legislature • Virginia • Submitted by Legislature • Constitutional requirement • Petition of people 4% of votes cast in last general election Submitted by Legislature for Governor Constitutional requirement Wisconsin • (e) Submitted by Legislature Constitutional requirement • Petition of people 15% of those voting in last general Constitutional requirement election and resident in at least % of counties of State Submitted by Legislature Virgin Islands... • Submitted by Legislature Constitutionsd requirement 50 THE BOOK OF THE STATES INITIATIVE PROVISIONS FOR STATE LEGISLATION

Initiative provisions Established by are also available to constitutional all or some local State Type (a) provision Petition requirement (b) government units (c)

Alaska D X 10% of those voting in the last general election and X resident in at least % of election districts Arizona D X 10% of qualified electors X Arkansas D X 8% of those voting in the last general election for X Governor California D X 5% of votes cast in the last general election for X Governor Colorado B X" 8% of votes cast in the last general election for X Secretary of State Idaho D X 10% of votes cast in the last general election for X Maine I X Governor 10% of votes cast in last general election for Governor X Massachusetts I X 3% of votes cast in last general election for Governor X Michigan I X 8% of votes cast in last general election for Governor X Missouri D X 5% of voters in each of % of congressional districts X Montana D X 5% of qualified electors in each of at least M of X Nebraska D X legislative representative districts; total must equal 5% of total qualified electors Nevada I X 7% of votes cast in last general election for Governor X North Dakota. D X 10% of voters in last general election X Ohio B X 10,000 electors X Oklahoma D X 3% of electors X Oregon D X 8% of total vote for state office receiving largest X South Dakota I X number of votes in last general election 8% of votes cast in last election for Supreme Court X Utah B X Justice 5% of votes cast in last general election for Governor X Washington B X 10% of electors (direct); 5% from majority of counties X Wyoming D X (indirect) (d) 8% of votes cast in last general election for Governor X 15% of voters in last general election and resident in X (a) The initiative may be direct or indirect. The direct type, chusetts the measure must also be approved by at least 30 per­ designated D in this table, places a proposed measurat e leason tth %e of countiecent of s thine Statballote s cast. ballot for submission to the electorate, without legislative (c) In addition to those listed in this column, the following action. The indirect type, designated I, requires the Legislature States have an initiative process that is available only to local to act upon an initiated measure within a reasonable period units of government: Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minne­ before it is voted upon by the electorate. In some States both sota, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Ver­ types, designated B, are used. mont, Virginia and West Virginia. (b) In each State wher^e the initiative may occur, a majority (d) These requirements are established by law. of the popular vote is required to enact a measure. In Massa­