CLT
UPDATE
Thursday, August 4, 2005
Petition filing deadline passes
Recognizing an uphill battle for a
pending proposal to change the way legislative districts are drawn,
a coalition of advocacy and government watchdog groups are taking
another route to help voters have the chance to weigh in on the
issue. Led by Common Cause Massachusetts, the coalition is pushing
to change the state's constitution and create a seven-member
appointed commission to draw legislative districts, putting an end
to so-called gerrymandering....
The coalition also consists of NAACP New England Area Conference,
Citizens for Limited Taxation, MassVOTE, and Oiste the
Massachusetts Political Organization.
Chip Faulkner, associate director of Citizens for Limited
Taxation, related Massachusetts' elections system to Louisiana,
where Faulkner said former Gov. Edwin Edwards once said he couldn't
be beat in a re-election campaign unless he was found in a motel
with a "dead woman or a live boy." "It was true of him at the time,"
Faulkner said. "The irony is that this could probably happen in this
state and they still would be re-elected because of the way they set
up the districts."
State House News Service
Monday, August 1, 2005
Redistricting reform advocates begin push for ballot vote
Barbara Anderson's CLT Commentary
"Wednesday was the deadline for filing initiative
petitions."
Since yesterday was the deadline for filing initiative petitions, I
discussed the initiative petition process on New England Cable
News last night on NewsNight with Jim Braude at 8:30.
CLT is not filing a petition itself -- we're still trying to get the
income tax rollback done! But as soon as we have a list of petitions
filed, we will ask CLT activists if they are interested in collecting
signatures for any of them. We have endorsed the Common Cause
constitutional amendment for redistricting reform, story below.
|
 |
|
Barbara Anderson |
State House News Service
Monday, August 1, 2005
Redistricting reform advocates begin push for ballot vote
By Amy Lambiaso
Recognizing an uphill battle for a pending proposal to change the way
legislative districts are drawn, a coalition of advocacy and government
watchdog groups are taking another route to help voters have the chance
to weigh in on the issue. Led by Common Cause Massachusetts, the
coalition is pushing to change the state's constitution and create a
seven-member appointed commission to draw legislative districts, putting
an end to so-called gerrymandering.
Lawmakers currently draw districts every 10 years, based on population
shifts, and critics of the system said legislators are not accountable
enough, often seek to protect incumbents from competitors, and argue the
system leads to "disenfranchised" minority populations.
"I know there are plenty of legislators who are very altruistic in their
requests for their districts, but there are others that are not," said
Pamela Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause. "The whole process is
really set up, as any institution is, for self-preservation."
Initiative petitions require the support of 51 lawmakers meeting in a
joint Constitutional Convention during two consecutive sessions to
advance to the ballot. Grass roots sponsors must collect thousands of
signatures from the public to advance their proposals. Constitutional
amendments advanced through the Legislature must receive the support of
101 lawmakers in two consecutive sessions.
The pending legislative proposal is sponsored by 58 representatives and
senators. After a public hearing on the bill in April, the Election Laws
Committee voted in May to not recommend the proposal.
Rep. Anthony Petruccelli (D-East Boston), chairman of the Election Laws
Committee, said there were several concerns about the makeup of the
commission and the removal of the Legislature's power from the process.
Wilmot said the composition of the commission is different from what is
currently pending for consideration at the convention, based on the
feedback they received. Under both proposals, the Legislature would not
be able to amend the plan submitted by the commission for final
approval, only vote to approve or reject the plan.
"I just don't see how as a legislator I could support something like
that," Petruccelli said. "It's a state law we're talking about. That's
what the Legislature does. It's something that I don't take lightly and
it's something we should continue to do."
The proposal, similar to an Iowa law, would establish a seven-member
commission, with members appointed by seven different people. Under the
proposal, the attorney general appoints a retired judge, the secretary
of state appoints a civil rights expert, and the governor appoints a
college professor specializing in political science or government. The
speaker of the House, Senate president, and minority leaders for each
branch would also make appointments based on certain criteria.
The plans would be open for a period of public comment and review and go
before the Legislature for final enactment, without the opportunity for
amendments. Supporters of the proposal and critics of the system say
lawmakers are not likely to give up their current constitutional right
to create their own districts, even after state courts have struck down
the last three district maps that were challenged. They say the
initiative petition process is the best way to inform the public of the
problem and induce an outcry for change. Non-binding questions on the
issue in 15 districts last November were supported by an average of 67
percent, according to Common Cause.
"It doesn't take an Einstein to figure out that this is a difficult
issue for the institution, and a difficult one to enact," Wilmot said.
"In order for us to have the best shot possible, we need a tsunami of
public opinion."
At a press conference here today to announce their campaign, some
supporters said the current system has prevented any shift in party
representation, giving the Democratic Party and incumbents an unfair
advantage. According to the Mass Fair Districts Coalition, former
Attorney General Scott Harshbarger and former Harvard President Derek
Bok will sign the petition filed with the attorney general's office this
week. The coalition also consists of NAACP New England Area Conference,
Citizens for Limited Taxation, MassVOTE, and Oiste the
Massachusetts Political Organization.
Chip Faulkner, associate director of Citizens for Limited
Taxation, related Massachusetts' elections system to Louisiana, where
Faulkner said former Gov. Edwin Edwards once said he couldn't be beat in
a re-election campaign unless he was found in a motel with a "dead woman
or a live boy." "It was true of him at the time," Faulkner said. "The
irony is that this could probably happen in this state and they still
would be re-elected because of the way they set up the districts."
Lawmakers and supporters at the press conference said they are
optimistic that a question similar to what is being proposed will reach
the 2008 ballot, given the two routes currently being pursued.
Common Cause led past successful initiative petition efforts relating to
the campaign finance laws, changes to the open meeting and ethics laws,
and most recently the Clean Elections campaign, a system of public
campaign financing that was eventually repealed by the Legislature.
Wilmot said she is not hesitant to pursue another initiative petition,
even with the outcome of Clean Elections, because it is an important
tool for the public to have in order to affect policy.
"Clearly the initiative petition process is not given the respect we'd
like," she said, "but we believe strongly that it is an important
process."
The coalition must file the proposed ballot question supported by 10
signatures with Attorney General Thomas Reilly's office by Wednesday to
advance. If Reilly's office determines the question fit for the ballot,
petitioners then have two months to collect at least 65,825 certified
voter signatures to advance the question. The question could reach the
2008 ballot at the earliest.
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
|