signature requirements
Today, Citizens in Charge released a mailer sent to residents of Montgomery County, Maryland Delegate Eric Leudtke’s district informing citizens of the destructive impact Leudtke’s House Bill 493 will have on the state’s citizen referendum process.
“Delegate Leudtke’s bill, filled with new rules, regulations and signature disqualification penalties, will effectively stop the public’s ability to use the petition process in Maryland,” said Paul Jacob, president of Citizens in Charge.
For Immediate Release:
Friday, March 15, 2013
Contact: Paul Jacob or Neal Hobson at (571) 327-0441
National Referendum Group Goes on Offense
With Targeted Mailer Against Leudtke’s Bill
(LAKE RIDGE, VA) – Citizens in Charge, a national voter rights group focused on the ballot initiative and referendum process, has gone on offense and gone straight to the voters to protect referendum rights in Maryland with a targeted mailer against House Bill 493, naming its chief sponsor, Montgomery County Delegate Eric Leudtke.
The Idaho Senate voted today to make it tougher for initiatives or referenda to qualify for the state’s ballot, while saying repeatedly that the move had nothing to do with the successful repeal of “Students Come First” legislation in November.
Under SB 1108, measures wouldn’t qualify unless they had signatures from 6 percent of the voters in each of 18 of Idaho’s 35 legislative districts, rather than just 6 percent statewide, as current law requires. It passed the Idaho Senate on a 25-10 vote; the bill now moves to the House.
“This allows rural Idaho to participate in this process,” said Sen. Jeff Siddoway, R-Terreton.
The process by which Marylanders petition a new law to referendum would become more difficult under a bill under consideration in Annapolis.
Republicans view the electronic petition process as a way to level the playing field with the Democratic majority. Others argue, “What do you need elected officials for if tough issues are always put on a ballot?”
Essentially, the debate divides over whether it’s power to the people or a power grab by the Democrat-controlled State House.
North Dakota voters could decide if they want to require more signatures and a more statewide approach when citizens want to put issues up to statewide vote.
Rep. Al Carlson, R-Fargo, has introduced House Concurrent Resolution 3011, which would require any citizen initiated measure that would potentially cost more than $20 million, should it pass, to be placed on a general election ballot. Measures with less than a $20 million impact could still be put on a primary or general election ballot.
Washington’s Initiative 517 is well on its way through the Legislature and recently earned some new allies. An unlikely supporter, perhaps, is attorney Stonewall Jackson Bird, who has never supported an initiative sponsored by Tim Eyman.
Bird has a special interest in I-517 though, as one of its provisions requires a vote on any initiative that receives the required number of verified signatures, stopping any legal actions that would keep it off the ballot. A previous local initiative that Bird championed, dealing with corporate personhood, was struck down in court before voters had a chance to weigh in at the ballot box.
< ![endif]—>
Citizens in Charge found itself on the front lines again yesterday as our president, Paul Jacob, traveled to Annapolis, Maryland, to testify in opposition to House Bill 493. The referendum or “People’s Veto” is already a tough proposition in the Old Line State. Only once in the last 20 years – in 2012 – have citizen-initiated referendums made their way onto the ballot.
Will legislators never learn? The people want to take part in government too. Members of the legislature in the Beehive State want to sting the people once again with changes to make the initiative process more difficult. This time, to correct a “mistake” that was made two years prior.
The Massachusetts General Court [the state legislature] Joint Committee on the Judiciary recommended Monday that two bills aimed at doubling the signature requirements for ballot initiatives ought not to pass. H 1830, sponsored by Rep. Denise Provost, was heard by the committee on March 13; and S 13, sponsored by Sen. Stanley Rosenberg, was heard April 14.
As states around the country tackle redistricting based on the 2010 census, the new population numbers also make things harder for some initiative proponents.
From Ballot Box News:
Because the 2010 census shows that North Dakota’s population increased 4.7% compared to 2000…election law numerical requirements will now rise 4.7%, for the period covering the next ten years. North Dakota’s Secretary of State says the increase applies immediately, even to initiatives that are currently circulating.
We’ve been telling you for some time about Maryland’s ridiculously strict requirements for a valid signature on a referendum petition. That requirement has taken out another effort by citizens to exercise their referendum rights in Howard County as 36% of their petition signatures were rejected.
Mike Parson hates voters, that is the only thing we can conclude. Why else would he try year after year to gut Missouri voters’ ballot initiative process?
City officials are considering a challenge to a recent Arizona Supreme Court ruling that requires officials to use a lower signature threshold to verify referendum petitions than previously used. On March 26 the Arizona Court of Appeals a lower court decision that held Phoenix’s method for evaluating petitions violated the state’s constitution. The case hinges on what election signature requirement should be tied to.
Back in December, the Maryland Court of Appeals upheld a lower court decision that mandated signatures on referendum petitions exactly mirror signatures on voter registration cards. So, if someone is registered as “John Paul Smith” but signs a petition “John P. Smith” or “John Smith” then his signature is not counted. Dubbed the “mirror law”, referendum process supporters have charged that it makes it impossible to mount a successful referendum campaign in the state.