The Webster-Kirkwood Times offers a very detailed rundown of the initiative petitions now circulating on the streets of Missouri.

I think it's safe to call this a trend: there is momentum, across the country, for putting new restrictions on the ballot initiative process. In Oregon, top state officials are trying to clamp down on the number of initiatives. The same is true in Arizona.

Now comes the Missouri legislature, where bills have been introduced to require a 60 percent vote to pass an initiative -- and to raise signature requirements for qualifying measures. The super-majority requirement, if adopted (and Missouri came close to adoping limits on the process last year), would almost certainly to reduce the number of initiaties on the ballot. The signature requirement's impact would be different: it probably would merely add to the costs of qualifying initiatives, ensuring that only the  wealthiest people and interest groups can sponsor measures. In California, I've supported raising initiative signature requirements -- but only as part of an effort to reduce signature requirements for referenda. The Missouri bills seem directed at denying the public access to the ballot. More details on the Missouri legislation via Ballot Access News.

During the Prop A campaign in Missouri, voters were told that the measure, which loosened restrictions on gambling, would produce money for a "tamper proof" education fund that couldn't be tapped for any spending other than schools. But now, with the state budget a mess and the economy heading south, Missouri lawmakers are preparing to do some tampering.

Missouri is hardly alone in this. Dozens of states are breaking into voter-approved funds. In California, going after funding sources the voters set aside for other purposes has become the state sport. Gov. Schwarzenegger, who rose to power by championing a ballot initiative to set aside for after-school programs, has joined the bandwagon, calling for raids on voter-approved funds for mental health and children's program in his budget proposal this week.

A state legislator in Missouri, Mike Parson, is proposiing two major changes in the signature gathering game. 1. Requiring all signature gatherers to register with the state. 2. Barring petition circulators from being paid per signature. Instead, they would have to be paid by the hour.

It's not clear that Parson's first proposal is legal. Petitioning the government is an essential part of First Amendment freedoms, and any law to restrict petition circulators is unlikely to survive the courts. The second idea is not legally suspect, but it would have the effect of reducing access to the ballot. The per-signature system of payment produces far more signatures, more efficiently, than any other system.

An alternative fuels measure -- similar to California's Prop 7 -- did not appear to have enough signatures to qualify for the November ballot in Missouri. But a judge has reversed that decision, the Columbia Missourian reports. The issue was not the total number of signatures but the initiative's requirement with Missouri's distribution requirement. In Missouri, initiative sponsors must collect a minimum amount of signatures in six of the state's nine Congressional districts.

The initiative in question would require require utilities to use renewable fuels for at least two percent of the electricity they sell in the state by 2011, and for 15 percent of electricity by 2021.

In Missouri, the Service Employees International Union, the largest labor union in the country, is backing an initiative to move funding from nursing home care to home health care. SEIU is rapidly organizing home health care workers nationally, and this initiative is designed to produce more workers to organize in the Show Me State.

Raising taxes is almost always difficult politically. When it comes to tax-hiking ballot measures, the trick is to find a politically popular cause to fund. Sam Page, a candidate for lieutenant governor in Missouri, may have come up with the best possible tax ballot measure so far. He proposes a ballot mesaure to raise sales taxes by one-eighth of a cent to fund "veterans' homes, services and programs." Just try to be the poor soul organizing a no campaign against that. It's too late to qualify measures for November, so the legislature would have to put it on the ballot. Look for politicians in other states to copy this.

STRIKE TWO: Arkansas's attorney general, for the second time, has rejected the language of a ballot initiative filed to deny public benefits to unauthorized immigrants. The a.g. has said the language is ambiguous and that initiative sponsors need to hire an attorney; he suggested that he could substitute language himself, but after being criticized for his first rejection of the measure, he decided not to.

THESE COPS ARE MAD: Police officers in Monrovia, Calif are locked in a contract fight, and they've decided to use the ballot initiative process to help. They're circulating petitions on two local initiatives: one that would mandate they are paid at least the average salary of other local police departments, and another to prevent other city officials from making more than their counterparts in nearby municipalities. Also, they have posted billboards around town that read: "You're Approaching Monrovia. Higher Violent Crime. Fewer Officers Patrolling. Thank the City Manager and City Council." 

This Associated Press story from Missouri tries to turn what is routine into a scandal. A reporter watches signature gathering in St. Louis on multiple ballot measures, and interviews a man who signs his name three separate times, not realizing he is signing three separate petitions -- including a Ward Connerly-backed anti-affirmative action initiative he doesn't like -- instead of just one. It appears the gatherer talked ot him only about the first petition, an eminent domain measure, and not the others, including the affirmative action one. This is treated as an outrage.

Yes, it would be nice if gatherers patiently explained everything they are doing, but this is typical behavior and -- in the next phrase I'm practicing law without a license -- doesn't violate misrepresentation laws, despite the claims of the AP. Signature gatherers -- who are paid by the signature -- typically carry all of the better paying petitions in a state on their clipboards, and love to get signatures on multiple measures. It is not the gatherers' job or responsiblity to explain what voters are signing. It's the responsibility of voters. The gentleman in the AP story could have simply taken the time to read each of the things he was signing. It is not too much to ask. Signature gatherers are there to collect signatures, not to protect you from yourself.

I'll be out of pocket the rest of Thursday--in transit...

Ralph Nader's challenge to an Arizona law prohibiting non-residents from collecting signatures on presidential petitions has been scheduled for an April 15 hearing before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

RENEWABLE INITIATIVES: From a small paper in Missouri, a pretty good overview of renewable energy standards in different states, with some attention to those states that have imposed these by ballot initiative.

STILL NOTHING FROM  COLORADO MEETING: Rocky Mountain News says the governor's attempt to head off labor-business initiative war didn't go well. And here's more evidence that the ill will is building.

SAN DIEGO PORT: Opposition mounts to a San Diego ballot measure that could lead to commercial development inside that city's struggling port.