Weekend Round Up: Voters Can't Revoke Florida Signatures; New Colorado Restrictions

NO REVOCATION IN FLORIDA: A Florida appeals court ruled that voters cannot revoke their signatures on ballot initiative petitions. The court struck down as unconstitutional a 2007 on signature revocation, saying that such revocation was not part of the state constitution and could "serve to burden" the initiative process. The context: Florida, more than any other state, has taken measures to restrict direct democracy and signature gathering--this ruling could undermine part of that move.

COLORADO BILL FOOLISHLY ATTEMPTS TO STOP OUT OF STATERS: New legislation in Colorado, which is awash in ballot initiatives, would require initiative sponsors to hire only Colorado residents. Such rules exist in other states; in Oklahoma, the attorney general is prosecuting an initiative sponsor and a signature gathering company executive for using out of staters. The problem with such legislation, as has been noted here before, is that it does not stop initiatives but merely makes the process much costlier. (Bringing in experienced, out-of-state people is far cheaper and more efficient than hiring and training local crews). When the process is more expensive, the use of the initiative is limited to the wealthiest of interests. Here's a better approach: increase penalties and step up enforcement against fraud in gathering (fake names, fake voters, etc.). And if policymakers don't want initiatives, they should be honest about it and ask the people to remove initiatives from their state constitutions. (Half the states have no initiative). But those who seek reform profess to be wanting to protect democracy. And the most democratic reform is one that politicians never offer: reducing the number of signatures required so that qualifying a ballot measure is cheaper. A lower price would open up the initiative process to more kinds of interests and groups -- and might actually reduce the use of paid signature gatherers, from in state and out of state.

ARNOLD AGAINST FIRST OF TWO EMINENT DOMAIN MEASURES: Gov. Schwarzenegger announced Friday that he opposes Prop 98, the first of the two competiting eminent domain initiatives on the June California ballot. Prop 98 is backed by conservatives, including anti-tax groups, and includes a broad ban on eminent domain for private development. It also would all but eliminate rent control. In taking this position, Schwarzenegger sided with county and city officials, who have been near constant allies of the governor during his time in office. The governor also expressed concern that the initiative would make it difficult to condemn land for infrastructure, particularly water-related infrastructure. Schwarzenegger's statement was silent on Prop 99, the counter-initiative that the cities have qualified that includes far less onerous restrictions on eminent domain. The measure is designed largely to help them defeat Prop. 98.

RUNNER TURN IN: Sponsors of the "safe neighborhoods" initiative, billed as an anti-gang measure, announced that they have turned in signatures to qualify for the November ballot. The Fresno Bee has a report.

UNION DUES: Jon Fleischman at the Flash Report says a judge's ruling that SEIU improperly obtained and spent about $3 million from non-members to fight Schwarzenegger's 2005 special election initiatives is a good ruling, but comes far too late.