Citizens in Charge

A poll released today by Citizens in Charge Foundation shows a massive shift among California voters, when they are provided with more accurate information on Proposition 28.

“The polling shows clearly that giving voters more precise information in the ballot title dramatically changes their view on Prop 28. A recent poll using the official ballot title showed better than two-to-one support for the measure, while our poll with a more accurate title showed voters opposing Prop 28 by a nearly two-to-one margin,” said Citizens in Charge Foundation Chairman Michael Foudy.

Appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” California Governor Jerry Brown was asked by host David Gregory whether the state was less governable today than when Brown was governor between 1975 and 1983. Brown argued that the state was “more governable” and, moreover, was better off than the federal government because in California “we can appeal directly to the people through the initiative process.”

DAVID GREGORY: Quickly, this is your third term as California governor, is it less governable now than it used to be?

One hundred years ago, in 1912, Washington citizens adopted the state’s initiative petition process. Tomorrow (Friday, Feb. 17) four initiative experts will discuss that process at a forum sponsored by The Foley Institute, Washington State University and the Washington Secretary of State. The event, entitled, “A Century of Citizen Initiatives in Washington: Are they still democratic?” will be held at the General Administration Auditorium on Olympia’s Capitol Campus, with a buffet lunch beginning at 11:30 am and the program lasting until 1:00 pm.

Today, the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that California’s ban on same-sex marriage, Proposition 8, is unconstitutional. The ballot initiative was passed by California voters in November 2008 and challenged in federal court by two gay couples. The Ninth Circuit decision upholds the ruling by retired U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who first struck down the ballot measure in 2010.

In a separate decision, the appeals court refused to invalidate Walker’s ruling on the grounds that he should have disclosed he was in a long term same-sex relationship.  ProtectMarriage, the backers of Prop 8, are expected to appeal Tuesday’s decision to a larger panel of the 9th Circuit or directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Second House Amendment Committee, a new group formed by initiative rights activists in Nebraska, filed an initiative constitutional amendment this week to lower the signature requirements for qualifying citizen initiatives. The group also filed a campaign finance registration, which is required once at least $5,000 has been raised by a ballot committee.

“I am confident that with the dedication of our volunteers and the commitment I have secured from people who are friends to petition rights, this issue will be on the November ballot,” committee member Kent Bernbeck told reporters.

In an important decision for initiative rights, the California Supreme Court today unanimously told the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that the proponents of initiatives in California have a legal right to defend their voter-enacted measures against legal challenges:

…the justices sided with Proposition 8 sponsors, who’ve argued they should be able to appeal a federal judge’s decision last year striking down the same-sex marriage ban because the governor and attorney general have refused to defend the voter-approved law. The state Supreme Court overwhelmingly agreed that Proposition 8 backers can go it alone in trying to preserve the gay marriage ban.

George Will’s recent column, “A republic, guaranteed,” generally scoffs at a lawsuit filed in federal court in Colorado attempting to overturn the state’s voter-initiated Taxpayer Bill of Rights amendment, which caps state spending. But while disagreeing with the goal of the lawsuit, Mr. Will seems to in part agree with those who filed it. At least when they argue in their legal brief that there is a “contest between direct democracy and representative democracy.”

Californians’ initiative, referendum and recall process is as hot a topic for debate as ever. That’s apt, for this year marks the process’s 100th anniversary.

On October 10, 1911, Californians went to the polls to enact these democratic checks on government after Governor Hiram Johnson persuaded legislators to put them on the ballot. On October 10, 2011, I’ll be in Sacramento at an event sponsored by Citizens in Charge Foundation to celebrate the centennial.

In a decision released late yesterday, Federal Judge Joseph Bataillon struck down Nebraska’s initiative law requiring petition circulators to be residents of the state, declaring the statutory provision “unconstitutional” as a violation of the First Amendment rights of Nebraskans.

The decision was a surprise to many observers. Although in recent years residency laws have been struck down unanimously by three separate federal circuit courts (Sixth, Ninth and Tenth), there is an Eight Circuit case from a decade ago (Initiative & Referendum Institute v. Jaeger), which upheld a North Dakota residency law. When plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction in this case, Judge Bataillon denied it and signaled that the Jaeger case would be controlling.

Next month in San Francisco, I’ll participate in a panel discussion entitled, “How Do We Put The People Back in The Initiative Process?”

The title is far too negative, as I’ll be pointing out that the people of California are already “in the initiative process,” relishing their power to vote on every measure, defeating even the biggest spending issues backed by special interests, passing needed reforms. Yet, there are important ways to improve the process.

The Sacramento Bee reports that the California Legislature passed Senate Bill 448 and sent it to Governor Jerry Brown’s desk yesterday. Brown now has 12 days to sign or veto the bill.

SB 448 requires only persons circulating initiative, referendum or recall petitions to wear a large badge or sign on their chest proclaiming that they are a “PAID SIGNATURE GATHERER,” if they are compensated in any way for their efforts.

At the Fox & Hounds website, Joel Fox reports that “signatures calling for a referendum on the so-called Amazon tax law requiring out-of-state Internet companies to collect sales taxes from California buyers are piling up.”

If enough signatures are collected in the short 90-day window permitted for referendum petitions — and Fox is predicting that Amazon’s signature drive will, in fact, finish early — the tax would be stayed from going into effect until the voters get to decide the matter at the June 2012 primary election.

In all, Wisconsin voters recalled nine state senators, three Democrats and six Republicans, forcing them to stand for new elections. So far, one incumbent D has been re-elected and four of six Rs have kept their seats, with two GOP senators defeated. The last two districts vote today, with two incumbent Democrats on the ballot against Republican challengers.

An article in today’s St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports on the broad-based coalition supporting a new initiative – the Your Vote Counts Act – that would make it harder for legislators to overturn an initiative without sending it back to the people for their approval.

Citizens in Charge has endorsed the ballot measure and is working with individuals and groups in the Show Me state, all across the political spectrum, to gather the signatures required to place the measure on the 2012 ballot.