To create section 35 of article IV of the constitution; Relating to: legislative suspension of rules promulgated by state agencies (first consideration).
Impact
If passed, this amendment could significantly alter the regulatory landscape within the state. It would enable lawmakers to directly influence administrative regulations, potentially leading to faster responses to changing conditions or public concerns. However, such power could also result in the disbanding of necessary regulations that have been established to protect public interests. This raises questions about oversight, accountability, and the possible ramifications of a legislatively-driven approach to rule-making.
Summary
AJR133 aims to amend the state constitution by adding a provision that grants the legislature the authority to suspend rules established by state agencies, either indefinitely or for a specified duration. This amendment would allow for suspension through a majority vote in both the assembly and the senate, effectively bypassing the usual requirements for presentment to the governor. The bill signifies a shift in the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches concerning how state rules are applied and enforced.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding AJR133 has reflected a notable division among legislators. Proponents argue that it brings needed control to elected officials over bureaucratic rules, ensuring that the legislative intent is honored and that agencies do not create regulations that might go unchecked. Conversely, opponents express concern over the potential for abuse of power, fearing that the suspension of rules could undermine important protections and lead to a lack of accountability for state agencies.
Contention
Notable points of contention revolve around the degree of control that the legislature would exert over state agencies. Critics worry that the ease with which rules could be suspended might lead to a chaotic regulatory environment, where agencies cannot function effectively. Supporters counter that such measures are essential for ensuring that state regulations remain relevant and responsive to the needs of the public, especially in times of crisis or urgent demand. This debate encapsulates broader discussions about governmental authority and the checks and balances necessary for effective governance.
Requiring each resolution adopted by the legislative assembly proposing a constitutional amendment and each initiative petition and measure proposing a constitutional amendment to be comprised of a single subject.
A concurrent resolution to amend and reenact section 9 of article III and section 16 of article IV of the Constitution of North Dakota, relating to requiring each resolution adopted by the legislative assembly proposing a constitutional amendment and each initiative petition and measure proposing a constitutional amendment to be comprised of a single subject.
A concurrent resolution to amend and reenact sections 7 and 13 of article IV of the Constitution of North Dakota, relating to sessions of the legislative assembly; and to provide an effective date.
A concurrent resolution to amend and reenact section 9 of article III and section 16 of article IV of the Constitution of North Dakota, relating to the threshold for approving a constitutional amendment.