Tolbert: Minimum Wage Issue’s Fate Could Hinge On Alcohol Expansion Lawsuit

Currently two issues have qualified for the November ballot through citizen-initiated petitions – a constitutional amendment that would eliminate virtually all state and local laws prohibiting alcohol sales and an initiated act that would gradually raise the state minimum wage.

While the alcohol issue is currently facing a court challenge, no lawsuit has yet been filed against the minimum wage issue.  However, the fate of the two could be tied.

The lawsuit regarding expanding alcohol sales – brought by a group called the Citizens for Local Rights – challenges whether the petitions were filed within the time afford by the state constitution.  The language of Amendment 7, which spells out the petition process, states that the petitions “shall be filed with the Secretary of State not less than four months before the election at which they are to be voted upon.”  Since this year’s election is on November 4, that puts the four month deadline on July 4.  This year, the Secretary of State’s office was closed that day, but it allowed petitions to be submitted through the following Monday, July 7.

Both the alcohol petitions and the minimum wage petitions were filed on that Monday, July 7.  The lawsuit argues that the constitution does not provide this leeway on the four month deadline and therefore the petitions are not valid.  The Secretary of State’s response argues that the extension was allowable pointing to – among other things – Act 653 of 1999 which states, “If an election law deadline occurs on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, the deadline shall be the next day which is not a Saturday Sunday, or legal holiday.”

Those I have spoken with feel the court could rule either way on this issue with the ruling likely coming down later this month.  However, if the court strikes down the alcohol issue, what will happen to the minimum wage issue? Since both groups filed on July 7, would both issues be struck down?

“If the alcohol ballot issue is struck from the ballot by the lawsuit, it could effect the minimum wage ballot issue as well,” said Arkansas Secretary of State spokesperson Laura Labay. “We have brought that fact to the court’s attention in our pleading and will await the court’s ruling.”

The Secretary of State pointed out to the court in its filing this week that “other initiative petitions may be impacted by Petitioners’ Complaint. Two initiative petitions were initially filed on July 7, 2014.”

The question remains if anyone will actually file a lawsuit challenge against the minimum wage.  While Democrats have stoked the issue in hopes that the populist ballot measure could rally their base, Republicans have offered some reluctant support of varying degrees.  And while the alcohol issue has businesses with interests directly in opposition to the measure, there is no clear group with funds available to oppose the minimum wage increase. Those that do could have reluctance to actually put a name on the lawsuit.

Although it is possible the court could clarify both issues with a ruling on the alcohol issue, I would bet against it without a separately filed suit.  And without guidance from the court, the Secretary of State’s office would be unlikely to intervene.

“This issue was placed on the ballot by the people of Arkansas; that needs to be respected and defended, and that is what we plan to do,” said Labay when asking about this possible outcome stopping short of saying what the ultimate decision of the Secretary of the State would be in this hypothetical situation.

Of course, all this could easily be cleared up if someone eventually files a similar challenge based on the July 4 deadline.