Missouri: State-level pubs and dems trying to make ballot initiatives harder
Posted by Clyde Middleton
on Jan 23 2010 Filed under Politics.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
(h/t Ballot Access News) One republican and two democrats have introduced three separate bills all designed to make it more difficult to get ballot initiatives in front of the voters. Let’s put this succinctly: What is wrong with you clowns?
Republican version, Bill Summary: HJR 63 — Initiative Petitions
Upon voter approval, this proposed constitutional amendment changes the requirements for submitting an initiative petition that proposes an amendment to the Missouri Constitution by increasing the number of signatures required from 8% to 15% of the legal voters in each of two-thirds of the state’s Congressional districts before it may be placed on the ballot. The number of signatures required for a petition proposing a law is increased from 5% to 10% of those voters.
The effect seems to be a doubling of the cost for a citizen of Missouri to get a ballot initiative qualified. I do not care if it will also cut the number of initiatives by “out-of-state” interest groups. You are stifling the ability of citizens to control their government. It is wrong on its very face.
Democrat 1 version, Bill Summary: SB 796 – Modifies requirements pertaining to petition circulators
Petition circulators shall not be paid based on the number of signatures they obtain. Persons who have broken laws that would constitute forgery in this state shall not qualify as petition circulators.
Currently, persons who misrepresent themselves on petitions are guilty of a misdemeanor. Under this act, those who knowingly do so are guilty of a class one election offense.
Currently, before a petition may be circulated for signatures, a sample sheet must be submitted to the Secretary of State who then sends a copy to the Attorney General and State Auditor. This act delays the delivery of the petition to the State Auditor until after the petitioner successfully collects between one and two thousand sponsoring signatures.
Currently, the Secretary of State has 30 days within which to send notice to the person submitting a petition sheet for approval after submission. This act shortens that time to 15 days.
If the form of petition is approved, the petitioner has 45 days from being notified of approval to submit between one and two thousand sponsoring signatures in support of the initiative or the petition shall be rejected. Within 5 days of receipt, the Secretary of State may send copies of the signature pages to election authorities for verification.
The effects may be two-fold: Cut the opportunity of fraud by circulator; and increase the cost of circulating petitions and/or decrease the use of skilled labor.
The time to check for fraud by a circulator is not in the signatures collected – it is when the signatures are verified. Verification is done anyway, so this effect seems an artifice.
By disallowing payment-per-signature, it seems that circulators will either have to be paid per deim regardless of results – thereby potentially increasing costs (again) – or volunteers – thereby reducing the talent pool.
Democrat 2 version, Bill Summary: HB 1441 Petition Circulators
This bill requires any in-state entity wishing to circulate a referendum or initiative petition to register with the Secretary of State at least one year prior to circulating any petition. An out-of-state entity is not allowed to circulate a petition.
We need the full text to better under this bill (my emphasis):
Every in-state entity that is not a natural person that wishes to circulate any petition for any initiative or referendum shall register with the secretary of state. No such in-state entity that has not been registered with the secretary of state under this section for at least one year shall circulate any petition for any initiative or referendum. No out-of-state entity shall circulate any petition for any initiative or referendum. The secretary of state shall determine the requirements of registration under this section, and shall promulgate rules to implement the provisions of this section. Any rule or portion of a rule, as that term is defined in section 536.010, that is created under the authority delegated in this section shall become effective only if it complies with and is subject to all of the provisions of chapter 536 and, if applicable, section 536.028. This section and chapter 536 are nonseverable and if any of the powers vested with the general assembly under chapter 536 to review, to delay the effective date, or to disapprove and annul a rule are subsequently held unconstitutional, then the grant of rulemaking authority and any rule proposed or adopted after August 28, 2010, shall be invalid and void.
One year? Why the delay? And completely outlawing out-of-state entities? This bill is pathetic. It will chill the citizens from rising up against legislative with which they disagree for over a year – unless, of course, they are organized and registered before.
The synthesizing of these laws, most disturbingly, seem to benefit large organizations such as the SEIU and ACORN (RIP). To work within all three of these bills, a well-organized entity merely needs to have a presence in the state, be registered, have people on salary, and have the ability to collect twice the number of signatures presently required.
Does that sound like a grassroots organization?
Related Posts
- What’s the fuss over Arizona? Missouri has had a similar law since 2008
- Dems refuse to accept their impending death, tag pubs as “BP114″
- One-third of dems know Reid is Senate majority Leader
- GOP leads Dems in Generic Ballot for First Time in 2 Years
- Petition to recall LA Senator Mary Landrieu
Short URL: http://libertypundits.net/?p=10482
