53 So. 2d 739 | Ala. | 1951
The following are the questions propounded by the House of Representatives in its resolution:
1. Is the subject of the proposed law single and clearly expressed in the title of the bill as required by Section 45 of the Constitution?
2. Does the proposed law in relieving the counties of the state from making appropriations for old age assistance purposes violate Section 88 of the Constitution, which requires the legislature to require the several counties of the state to make adequate provision for the maintenance of the poor?
3. Are the provisions of the bill definite, unambiguous, and certain to the extent that the law proposed would not be invalid if it were enacted in its present form?
The title of the bill is as follows: "To provide financial security for the aged; creating the Alabama Pension Board; defining its powers and duties; providing the qualifications for recipients of old age assistance; relieving the State Department of Public Welfare and the county departments of public welfare from their functions and duties in relation to the old age assistance program; and repealing Chapter 3 of Title 49 of the Code of Alabama (1940)."
Section 1 of the bill provides for creation of the pension board, for appointment of the members thereof, for the tenure and compensation of such members, and for filling of vacancies.
Section 2 provides for location of offices of the board, for employment of personnel, and fixes the duties of the board.
Section 3 provides that "Old age assistance grants shall be payable under this Act to any needy person who has attained the age of sixty-five years", and who meets the requirements therein specified.
Section 4 requires immediate turning over of certain records, reports and files by the State Department of Public Welfare and the several county departments of public welfare to the Pension Board, with proviso that said state and county departments continue to function under Code 1940, Title 49, Chapter 3, until December 31, 1951, after which such departments shall be relieved of all duties and responsibilities in connection with the old age assistance program which shall then be carried out completely by the Pension Board.
Section 5 provides for appropriation of state funds to be used in conjunction with federal funds granted for old age assistance purposes, and relieves county and city governing bodies of requirement to make appropriations for such purpose after December 31, 1951.
Section 6 is: "Effective January 1, 1952, Chapter 3 of Title 49, Code of Alabama (1940) is expressly repealed."
To the House of Representatives CAPITOL Montgomery, Alabama
Dear Sirs:
In re: Your inquiry set forth in H. R. No. 66, as to certain constitutional questions concerning H. B. No. 490.
We are of opinion that H. B. 490 attached to House Resolution No. 66 is not violative of § 45 of the Constitution of 1901 because of duplicity of subjects. See Johnson v. Robinson,
The provisions creating the Pension Board, providing for appointment of its members, prescribing their powers and duties and providing for compensation of its *160 members are cognate and germane to the general subject of said law.
We are further of the opinion that the provisions of said proposed law, which provide for the repeal of Chapter 3, Title 49, Code of 1940, which makes like provision for such relief, are likewise cognate and germane; that the purpose of said provision is to prevent duplication of authority and confusion in the administration of such public welfare.
We are further of opinion that said bill does not impinge the provisions of § 88 of the constitution which imposes on the legislature the duty "to require the several counties of this state to make adequate provision for the maintenance of the poor", provision for which is made in Title 44, §§ 1 to 20 (inclusive), Code of 1940, under the subject of "Paupers", the indigent poor. See Report of the Attorney General 1945, p. 19.
The power of the legislature in this field is plenary in the absence of constitutional restriction. Johnson v. Robinson, supra.
The other inquiry, No. 3, does not comply with the provisions of the Advisory Opinion Act and hence is not considered.
Respectfully submitted,
J. ED. LIVINGSTON Chief Justice JOEL B. BROWN A. B. FOSTER THOMAS S. LAWSON DAVIS F. STAKELY Associate Justices.
