Initiatives

While you were at the beach or barbecuing hot dogs, petition circulators were practicing democracy. The final sigs are pouring in. Four measures were filed at the last minute in Oregon: a measure to devote a percentage of lottery proceeds to crime fighting, a cap on attorney's fees, a measure to reduce the number of lawsuits, and the open primary "top two" measure.

In Arizona and Nebraska, Ward Connerly's local supporters have filed the signatures on their anti-affirmative action initiatives. The Nebraska initiative is the only measure that appears to have the signatures in that state. (Hat tip, Ballotpedia).

This is a big black eye for the signature gathering business. A Nevada district judge, James Todd Russell, has disqualified three well-funded ballot initiatives because of problems with the affidavits signed by petition circulators. These were arguably the three biggest initiatives in the state. One initiative would divert casino taxes to education and other state issues. Another was the son of Prop 13 measure that would have required a two-thirds vote in the legislature to raise taxes. Backers included a former state treasurer and former controller.

What happened? In July 2007, the state legislature adopted new requirements for the affidavits that signature gatherers sign to verify that signatures are real. These new requirements, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal,  included a statement that the gatherer personally circulated the document, that the number of signatures were counted, and that each signer had an opportunity to read the text of the initiative.

However, Nevada Secretary of State Ross MIller never updated his web site, which lists the rules for such affidavits, to reflect these changes. It appears that signature gatherers relied on the web site and thus did not comply with the new law.

Here's what the judge had to say: "It is unfortunate here that someone didn't do there homework prior to the circulation of these initiatives, although I think the secretary of state could probably have done a better job in this particular case."

Naturally, the progressive view is that the initiatives won't affect the presidential election except that they might hurt Republicans.  And here's the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center's look at the fall ballot measures.

Henry Nicholas, the billionaire Broadcom founder and funder of "tough on crime" ballot initiatives in California, has pleaded not guilty to securities and drug charges. For those interested in the case, you might check out the excellent work that Orange County Register reporter John Gittelsohn (a former competitor and friend of your blogger) has done on this subject.

It appears that labor is trying to shorten the playing field in the massive, multi-initiative union vs. business Colorado ballot contest.

The United Food and Commercial Workers -- the union best known for representing grocery store workers -- announced it has pulled two of four ballot initiatives it was circulating for signatures. The UFCW says this is a gesture of "negotiation," a peace offering in hopes that business interests won't back a "right-to-work" initiative sponsored by conservatives. We'll see. Signature gatherers in Colorado tell me that the initiatives being dropped did not appear to have gotten many signatures.

Those two measures would have increased commercial property taxes and required annual cost-of-living increases for workers in firms with 10 or more employees. The union continues to support two health-related measures, including an intiative requiring that firms with 20 or more employees provide health coverage. Similar legislation passed California in 2003 but was narrowly overturned by voter referendum in 2004.

Friend of the blog Robert Greene breaks them down -- including news that four initiatives have qualified -- at the LA Times' Opinion LA.

The debate over competing statewide initiatives on eminent domain -- Propositions 98 and 99 on the June 3 ballot in California -- is focusing on Prop 98's prohibition of rent control, the Contra Costa Times says. Recent polling shows that voters are inclined to turn down both initiatives.

That's what CQ claims in this interesting story. The angle of the piece is that initiatives, compared to past presidential years, are down this year in the 24 states that permit them because of a weariness among lawmakers and restrictions on signature gatherers. There's a grain of truth there, but the story claims more than it can prove. 

While the numbers are undeniably down from the '90s, it's awfully early to be counting this year's measures. Dozens of initiatives around the country are still gathering signatures and waiting for verification and certification for the ballot. What's more, a year to year comparison based on presidential years doesn't tell you much about ballot initiative trends. Many states hold their biggest elections in non-presidential years, making that a better time for initiative. (In fact, since initiative sponsors often are as interested in attention for their issue as winning, presidential years make a very bad time for initiatives). This methodology also discounts special elections, like California's eight-initiative monster in 2005.

Here's a San Jose Mercury News look at the two measures. One thing that distinguishes Prop 98 from 99 is the former's elimination of rent control, which is why it's backed by owners of apartment buildings and trailer parks, including Tribune Company chairman Sam Zell.

This piece in the Contra Costa Times asks whether there's "donor fatigue" as Gov. Schwarzenegger raises money for his redistricting initiative and perhaps, some sort of budget reform ballot measure (or measures) in November. It's a fair question. The problem may not be fatigue but donors' clear-eyed assessment of the political chances of redistricting and budget reform. Redistricting has a perfect record at the ballot over the last 15 years -- it's lost every time -- and budget reform proposals of all stripes (notably Prop. 56 in 2004--backed by Democrats and unions -- and Prop. 76 -- backed by Schwarzenegger and Republicans --  in 2005) have gone down to defeat. What is the point of spending good money on reform proposals that will go down to defeat, no matter their merits?