Tag Archives: Tennessee Constitution

Abortion-related Constitution amendment clears Senate hurdle

Posted on by

SJR 127, a resolution to offer voters the chance to amend the Tennessee Constitution regarding abortion rights, was approved on Monday by the Senate in a 24-8 vote. It had previously won approval with a simple majority in both houses of the 106th General Assembly.

The measure will now move to the House, where, this time, it must also pass with a two-thirds majority in order to be put before voters in the 2014 election. (Why not 2012? Keep reading.)

Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey, who as Speaker presided over the vote, praised today’s action in a statement:

For years liberal Democratic parliamentary maneuvering has thwarted passage of this resolution which has enjoyed strong support from majorities both inside and outside the legislature. I am proud to be a part of the pro-life Republican majority that will finally bring an end to judicial activist usurpation and put this measure to a vote of the people.

Democrat Betsy Phillips wasn’t so sure about the amendment’s legal footing. On her Twitter page, she noted that “by passing this amendment, we’ve brought the state constitution into conflict with itself, I think.” Phillips clarified this thought with a reference to Planned Parenthood v. Sundquist, in which the Tennessee Supreme Court decided that the Constitution’s right to privacy includes a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy. “I think the courts are going to have to decide if privacy rights outweigh abortion non-rights or not,” wrote Phillips.

The amendment itself:

Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother.

What’s next? As stated above, the proposed amendment must pass with a two-thirds majority (at least 66 votes) in the House of Representatives. Following that, provided it passes, and does not get vetoed by Governor Haslam, the ballot in the next gubernatorial election (November 2014) will include a referendum containing the amendment language. Constitution amendments are decided by voters in gubernatorial elections only, presumably to ensure a high turnout.

This ballot measure will pass if it receives a number of votes equal to half of the total votes cast for governor, plus one. If that happens, the state constitution will be amended.

Are our rights to hunt and fish in danger?

Posted on by

What you will

In 2006, Tennessee voters chose to add two amendments to the state constitution: one that more strictly defined the state definition of marriage, and another that allowed the General Assembly to create legislation that would in turn enable local governments to enact property tax freezes for persons on fixed incomes.

The amendments appear on the ballot just like candidates for office (and judicial retention questions) during a general election. The process of getting them there is designed broadly to reflect the will of the people through their representatives: both houses of the General Assembly must pass a bill that creates the amendment, in two legislative sessions. So, for example, were a constitutional amendment bill to be introduced in the upcoming 2011-12 session, it would have to

  • pass with a constitutional majority in the House of Representatives;
  • and pass with a constitutional majority in the Senate;
  • and then endure the same two tests in the 2013-14 session;
  • and of course the final decision would still remain with the voters in the next available general election (2014 in this sample scenario).

Oh deer. Here come those crappie lobbyists.

The Legislature has offered a new amendment that has made it past the requisite hurdles, thus you and I will vote it up or down this fall. This amendment would clarify the Constitution to specifically enumerate the rights of Tennesseans to hunt and fish. A Nashville television reporter on Thursday briefly examined the amendment and its proponents. Earlier this month, Richard Simms wrote about it in Chattanoogan.com’s Outdoors section. Here is the language of the proposed amendment:

The citizens of this state shall have the personal right to hunt and fish, subject to reasonable regulations and restrictions prescribed by law. The recognition of this right does not abrogate any private or public property rights, nor does it limit the state’s power to regulate commercial activity. Traditional manners and means may be used to take non-threatened species.

While it would be rare to find anyone opposed to the right to hunt and fish, there have been questions concerning the amendment’s necessity. To some observers, it doesn’t seem very likely that the Legislature would pass any law that would outlaw either of these time-honored traditions. And any governor worth his or her buckshot would surely veto it straight away (though our state government does have a weak veto). Lastly, the ensuing outrage would soon restore powder to the muzzle-loaders, and have reels again singing in the lake breezes. In other words, our rights to hunt and fish are likely secure with or without this amendment.

Nevertheless, the choice will be on the ballot in the upcoming election. In order for the amendment to pass, 50 percent plus one of those who cast a vote for governor must vote “Yea.” Though the two are not counted together, if you do not cast a vote in the gubernatorial election, your vote on the amendment is not counted toward the outcome.