Mississippi House Bill HC27

Mississippi 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/17/22
• Refer: 1/17/22
• Failed: 2/1/22

Caption

Constitution; signatures from any congressional district cannot exceed certain fractional portion of total number of signatures required for initiative petition.

Impact

If passed, this amendment would significantly alter how initiative petitions are submitted and assessed in Mississippi, impacting the constitutional amendment process. It places a clear restriction on the number of signatures that can come from any single congressional district, thereby promoting a broader geographical representation in the legislative initiative process. By imposing this limitation, the bill aims to prevent any one district from disproportionately influencing the outcomes of initiatives, fostering a more democratic mechanism for proposed changes to state law.

Summary

House Concurrent Resolution 27 proposes an amendment to Section 273 of the Mississippi Constitution of 1890, which seeks to modify the requirements for initiative petitions. Specifically, the amendment stipulates that signatures from qualified electors collected from any congressional district must not exceed one-fifth of the total number of signatures required for the petition to qualify for placement on the ballot. This amendment aims to ensure equitable representation across the state in the initiative process, potentially increasing the diversity of issues brought forth by different regions of Mississippi.

Contention

The proposal has sparked discussions regarding its implications for local governance and grassroots movements. Supporters argue that it curbs the potential for a single district to dominate the initiative process, thereby democratizing the legislative procedure. Conversely, critics may view this as a restriction that complicates the efforts of local advocates seeking to address specific community issues, arguing that it could hinder the ability of local populations to raise unique concerns through direct initiatives. This tension highlights the balance that must be struck between ensuring fair representation and allowing local voices to be heard in the state legislative process.