Previous | Next

§ 1. Proposals by legislature; approval by electors. Propositions for the amendment of this constitution may be made by concurrent resolution originating in either house of the legislature, and if two-thirds of all the members elected (or appointed) and qualified of each house shall approve such resolution, the secretary of state shall cause such resolution to be published in the manner provided by law. At the next election for representatives or a special election called by concurrent resolution of the legislature for the purpose of submitting constitutional propositions, such proposition to amend the constitution shall be submitted, both by title and by the amendment as a whole, to the electors for their approval or rejection. The title by which a proposition is submitted shall be specified in the concurrent resolution making the proposition and shall be a brief nontechnical statement expressing the intent or purpose of the proposition and the effect of a vote for and a vote against the proposition. If a majority of the electors voting on any such amendment shall vote for the amendment, the same shall become a part of the constitution. When more than one amendment shall be submitted at the same election, such amendments shall be so submitted as to enable the electors to vote on each amendment separately. One amendment of the constitution may revise any entire article, except the article on general provisions, and in revising any article, the article may be renumbered and all or parts of other articles may be amended, or amended and transferred to the article being revised. Not more than five amendments shall be submitted at the same election.

History: Adopted by convention, July 29, 1859; ratified by electors, October 4, 1859; L. 1861, p. 65; L. 1970, ch. 411, § 1; L. 1980, ch. 355; November 4, 1980.

Law Review and Bar Journal References:

Effective date of approved amendment is election day, Leonard F. Banowetz, 27 J.B.A.K. 207, 208 (1958).

Case in annotation No. 8 below discussed in 1957-59 survey of constitutional and administrative law, Fred N. Six and John W. Brand, Jr., 8 K.L.R. 222, 234, 235 (1959).

Selection to the Kansas Supreme Court, Stephen J. Ware, 17 Kan. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y, No. 3, 386 (2008).

Attorney General's Opinions:

Constitution of the state of Kansas; amendment and revision; submission of proposition by Legislature. 79-33.

Concurrent resolution adopted by 1985 Legislature may be amended by 1986 Legislature prior to being submitted to voters in November, 1986 election. 85-110.

Amendment of constitution; proposals by Legislature; approval by voters. 85-174.

Approval by electors; reclassification. 87-8.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Two or more amendments submitted, majority voting on either adopts. Prohibitory-Amendment Cases, 24 Kan. 700, 707, 709.

2. Section cited in considering legislative votes necessary to enact law. Railway Co. v. Simons, 75 Kan. 130, 140, 88 P. 551.

3. Submission at next general election mandatory; cannot be submitted later; limitation to three propositions precludes submission of previous proposition. The State, ex rel., v. Sessions, 87 Kan. 497, 500, 124 P. 403.

4. Right of lieutenant governor to vote in case of tie determined. Coleman v. Miller, 146 Kan. 390, 395, 71 P.2d 518. Affirmed: 307 U.S. 433, 59 S. Ct. 972, 83 L.Ed. 1385.

5. When adopted amendment becomes effective mentioned but not determined. Manning v. Davis, 166 Kan. 278, 281, 201 P.2d 113.

6. Secretary of state properly withheld publication of proposed amendment; resolution ineffective. State, ex rel., v. Shanahan, 173 Kan. 403, 404, 246 P.2d 305.

7. Proposed constitutional amendment must be printed in full on ballot. State, ex rel., v. Shanahan, 183 Kan. 464, 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 327 P.2d 1042.

8. Supreme Court has no power to engraft amendments to state constitution. State, ex rel., v. Mitchell, 194 Kan. 463, 466, 399 P.2d 556.

9. Proposition amending the executive article and repealing militia article improperly submitted in violation hereof and is void; proposition No. 2 amending article 14 properly submitted pursuant hereto. Moore v. Shanahan, 207 Kan. 1, 486 P.2d 506; 207 Kan. 645, 486 P.2d 506.

10. Proposition amending article 1 properly submitted pursuant hereto. Van Sickle v. Shanahan, 212 Kan. 426, 511 P.2d 223.

11. Cited in holding provisions of K.S.A. 65-4135(a)(7)(A) of uniform controlled substances act permitting forfeiture of homestead violate Kansas Constitution. State ex rel. Braun v. A Tract of Land, 16 Kan. App. 2d 757, 762, 829 P.2d 600 (1992).