standard. OPEN contends that “[i]f citizens must exercise the right of referendum perfectly, it amounts to no right at all.” Under the circumstances, we disagree. ¶ 13 The provisions of section 19-101(A) regarding insertion of the referendum description obviously serve to ensure that petition signers are informed about the document they are signing and the measure being referred. By requiring circulators to include a brief description of the referred measure in the petition itself, rather than by stapling it to the front, the legislature ensures that cir-culators cannot abuse the referendum process by later removing the stapled description and attaching a different description to the signatures. See Direct Sellers Ass’n v. McBrayer, 109 Ariz. 3, 6, 503 P.2d 951, 954 (1972) (<HOLDING>). Even without allegations of such fraudulent
holding that there is both a statutory and a constitutional right to a jury trial under erisa because congress lacks constitutional authority to limit right to a jury recognizing the right to trial by jury is a constitutional right to be given the same protections as other constitutional rights recognizing legislatures authority to safeguard peoples right to referendum by enacting legislation that supplements constitutional referendum provisions recognizing constitutional right to effective counsel recognizing a presumption against retroactive legislation