CLT
UPDATE
Thursday, April 10, 2003
Action needed now to save
our right to the initiative petition process
A diverse coalition including conservative antitax leaders, liberal activists, and a leading government watchdog group is mounting an attack on a proposed constitutional amendment that would make it much more difficult to enact laws through ballot referendum.
The coalition plans to show up in force today before the Legislature's Committee on Election Laws as it hears testimony on the controversial plan pushed by Democratic lawmakers....
"We are not going to let this thing happen," said Barbara
Anderson, executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation. CLT and Anderson have used the initiative petition process to drive a strong antitax agenda in Massachusetts, greatly influencing politics and policy makers in the 1980s and 1990s....
The proposal has drawn strong opposition from Secretary of State William F. Galvin. Attorney General Thomas Reilly has also voiced concerns about it.
"This is a direct attack on voters' rights," Galvin said. "There is no doubt that the objective here is to make it more difficult to bring questions before the voters for their decision. This merely increases legislative power."
...
Highlighting that power grab, they say, is the fact that next door to today's elections law hearing is another hearing by the Joint Committee on Public Service on a bill pushed by House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran. It would give him and the Senate president the power, with their members' approval, to set extra stipends for lawmakers.
Currently, any stipend has to be passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor.
"I will have two feet in two different rooms," said Pam Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause. "This is two examples of taking power from the public to influence the political process. It is symbolic of the trend of the centralization of power ... in the Legislature."
The Boston Globe
Thursday, April 10, 2003
Groups fight bid to tighten the rules on referendums
Direct democracy would be an endangered species in Massachusetts if state Sen. Stan Rosenberg (D-Amherst) gets his way and gains support for his proposals to gut the initiative petition process.
By cloaking his plans in "good government" rhetoric, Rosenberg apparently thinks he can convince voters he's improving the process, but voters won't be fooled. They know ballot questions are sometimes the only way to impose their will in a legislative process dominated by special interests. And they know the initiative petition process works just fine the way it is....
Maybe someday the initiative petition process will become obsolete. Legislators will represent the will of the voters and good government will reign on Beacon Hill. Pigs will fly then, too. For now, citizens need to preserve their power to represent themselves.
A Boston Herald editorial
Thursday, April 10, 2003
Ballot questions targeted
A CLT Action Alert!
Greetings activists and supporters:
We at CLT and our coalition allies prepared all day and into the late evening yesterday for
today's hearing
before the Legislature's Election Laws committee. This morning we will testify against
S-362 and S-363 -- Sen. Rosenberg's bills to kill the citizens'
initiative petition process. Last night we issued a news release to the
media statewide and printed our memo to the committee's members (a copy of
which will be handed out to the State House press corps today as well).
(Read today's CLT news release and the
Statement of the Coalition to Protect Citizen Initiatives.)
Now we need you to do your part if we are to win this
war and save the initiative process.
Below you'll find the address of the Committee on
Election Laws. It's time to let the committee and its members know how you
feel about this attempted usurpation of our right as citizens.
Remember, you're trying to
influence the committee, not alienate it, so make your
comments thoughtful and measured, without being vitriolic.
Address your envelope to:
The Joint Committee on Election Laws
Room 26
State House
Boston, MA 02133
Members of the committee include:
Senate
Joyce of Norfolk, Bristol and Plymouth
Glodis of Second Worcester
Nuciforo of Berkshire, Hampden, Hampshire and Franklin
Shannon of Second Middlesex
Wilkerson of Second Suffolk
Knapik of Second Hampden and Hampshire
House
Straus of Mattapoisett
Rivera of Springfield
Kaufman of Lexington
K. J. Murphy of Lowell
Reinstein of Revere
Petruccelli of Boston
Eldridge of Acton
Peisch of Wellesley
Wallace of Boston
Frost of Auburn
George of Yarmouth
If one of the committee members represents you in
either the Senate or House, follow up with a personal letter to him or
her, or give them a call at (617) 722-2080, the committee office's phone
number, or in their district office or at home.
Now is the time to act.
We're doing everything we can to kill this effort to
kill the initiative petition process. That's all we can do.
Now, the rest is up to you.
|
|
|
Chip
Ford |
The Boston Globe
Thursday, April 10, 2003
Groups fight bid to tighten the rules on referendums
By Frank Phillips, Globe Staff
A diverse coalition including conservative antitax leaders, liberal activists, and a leading government watchdog group is mounting an attack on a proposed constitutional amendment that would make it much more difficult to enact laws through ballot referendum.
The coalition plans to show up in force today before the Legislature's Committee on Election Laws as it hears testimony on the controversial plan pushed by Democratic lawmakers.
Among other changes, the proposal would raise by 50 percent the number of voter signatures required for a question to reach the state election ballot.
"We are not going to let this thing happen," said Barbara Anderson, executive director of
Citizens for Limited Taxation. CLT and Anderson have used the initiative petition process to drive a strong antitax agenda in Massachusetts, greatly influencing politics and policy makers in the 1980s and 1990s.
The coalition is convinced the proposal is aimed at stifling citizens' efforts, which over the years have resulted in changes in environmental, campaign finance, and anticorruption laws over the objections of Beacon Hill leaders. CLT is part of a group that includes Citizens for Participation in Political Action, the Sierra Club,
MassPIRG, Common Cause, the antigreyhound racing group Grey 2k USA, and Massachusetts Voters for Clean Elections.
The proposal has drawn strong opposition from Secretary of State William F. Galvin. Attorney General Thomas Reilly has also voiced concerns about it.
"This is a direct attack on voters' rights," Galvin said. "There is no doubt that the objective here is to make it more difficult to bring questions before the voters for their decision. This merely increases legislative power."
But Senate President Pro Tempore Stanley Rosenberg, an Amherst Democrat and lead sponsor of the proposal, said his amendment is designed to put the brakes on a process that is careening out of control. He said modern political campaign techniques - paid signature-gatherers, polling, focus groups, and 30-second television ads - have allowed for the system to be manipulated.
"People have learned how to game the system," he said.
Rosenberg said the referendum process, which was created in 1918, has not been revamped since 1950.
Petitions currently require 66,000 voters' signatures to reach the ballot. Under Rosenberg's proposal, that number would rise to 99,000.
Nationally, the referendum process has come under increasing fire, as well-financed special interests and millionaires have bankrolled campaigns to change state laws and constitutions.
But the coalition of groups lined up to battle the proposal says Rosenberg merely represents the trend on Beacon Hill for legislative leaders to consolidate power and shut out citizens' participation.
Highlighting that power grab, they say, is the fact that next door to today's elections law hearing is another hearing by the Joint Committee on Public Service on a bill pushed by House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran. It would give him and the Senate president the power, with their members' approval, to set extra stipends for lawmakers. Currently, any stipend has to be passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor.
"I will have two feet in two different rooms," said Pam Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause. "This is two examples of taking power from the public to influence the political process. It is symbolic of the trend of the centralization of power ... in the Legislature."
Return to
top
The Boston Herald
Thursday, April 10, 2003
A Boston Herald editorial
Ballot questions targeted
Direct democracy would be an endangered species in Massachusetts if state Sen. Stan Rosenberg (D-Amherst) gets his way and gains support for his proposals to gut the initiative petition process.
By cloaking his plans in "good government" rhetoric, Rosenberg apparently thinks he can convince voters he's improving the process, but voters won't be fooled. They know ballot questions are sometimes the only way to impose their will in a legislative process dominated by special interests. And they know the initiative petition process works just fine the way it is.
Sure, the Legislature has been perfectly willing to stomp all over voters' wishes when it thinks it can get away with it.
But still voters have gotten the income tax down to 5.3 percent, freed children from the oppression of bilingual education, and controlled property taxes by using the power of the ballot box.
Voters have also used their power judiciously. A ballot question abolishing the income tax was defeated last year. A drastic spending cut plan lost during the last fiscal crisis.
But the wisdom of voters is apparently lost on Rosenberg. He wants to double the number of signatures required to get an initiative petition or constitutional amendment on the ballot, setting the bar for citizens' groups far too high. (We must have missed his proposal to increase the number of signatures legislators need to get their names on the ballot.)
More ominously, Rosenberg proposes setting up two new commissions to tinker with the wording of the ballot question summary and to author a
"fiscal impact statement."
The fiscal impact committee includes the Massachusetts Municipal Association. And certainly these local leaders are experts at summarizing how devastating proposed spending and tax cuts can be.
Maybe someday the initiative petition process will become obsolete. Legislators will represent the will of the voters and good government will reign on Beacon Hill. Pigs will fly then, too. For now, citizens need to preserve their power to represent themselves.
Return to
top
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or
payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For
more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
|