A PROMISE TO KEEP: 5%
A Ballot Committee of
Citizens for Limited Taxation & Government
PO Box 408 * Peabody, MA 01960
Phone:(617) 248-0022 * E-Mail: cltg@cltg.org
Visit our web-page at: http://cltg.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------
*** Promise Update ***
Tuesday, April 7, 1998

Greetings activists and supporters:

The bankrolled special-interests are tightening their grip in their sadistic, cold-blooded strangulation of the initiative-referendum process.

The eighty-year old amendment, Article 48 of the Massachusetts Constitution, is under unprecedented attack from all quarters in an apparent concerted and all out effort to dismember it piece by piece.

Our phones are again ringing off their hooks with calls from frightened seniors who are again being harassed by teachers union bullies, again threatened with subpoenas if the do not comply and allow "a representative" into their home and provide a sample of their handwriting.

Worst of all, the teachers union bullies are wholly evasive when asked who they are and what they represent. According to reports we’ve been receiving (one from even a State Rep. in the western part of the state calling on behalf of her 83-year old constituent), the teachers union is attempting to lead the victim to believe they are representing us—CLT&G! -- in this harassment! The elderly constituent mentioned above had planned to travel next week to visit her son, but now fears leaving if she’s to be subpoenaed.

My final call last night was from a long-time member, a retired U.S. Army Colonel who’s wife is dying from cancer. He apologized for being able to collect only 20 signatures for us this time and explained how traumatic a period the past year has been for him and his four sons since learning of his wife’s fate, but wanted me to know about the call he received from "Priscilla Lyons, a Cambridge attorney." After he was done talking with her, he was convinced that she represented us in the signature challenge—until "Tom Shea" arrived at his home and he demanded identification. Mr. Shea, it turned out, was "the president of the Greater-Springfield Teachers Union"!

The teachers union today is even sending "a representative" to his son’s job in Connecticut to collect a sample of his son’s handwriting, though he is a Holyoke resident.

This will have a chilling effect on signing a petition in the future for those who are being so harassed, but that isn’t nearly enough for the enemies of democracy, the well-heeled special interests who can have their way with the Legislature, but fear the direct democracy of a ballot question.

If you know of anyone being so harassed:

1) Tell them who’s doing the harassing;
2) Let us know [617-248-0022] as we’re keeping a list and may later file a class-action lawsuit against the teachers union, as well as seek damages for their frivolous challenge, and;
3) Tell those being harassed who want to *do* something about this harassment (like the above Colonel) to write a letter describing the evasion and harassment in detail. Sign it and send it *immediately,* preferably by overnight delivery, to:
______________________________________________________________

Allan van Gestel
Justice of Suffolk Superior Court
Middlesex Superior Courthouse
40 Thorndike St., Room 8A
Cambridge, MA 02141

Re: Anderson et al. v. Secretary of Commonwealth
Civil Action 98-00462-H

______________________________________________________________

ALSO: If you will, please send us a copy (at the address at the top of this message), too!

Yesterday Barbara and I also sat in before the state Ballot Law Commission (SBLC) with Jim Braude (our old adversary when he was executive director of TEAM before leaving it, but this is bigger than past grudges). His and John O’Connor’s (John is a CLT&G member) Electric Deregulation referendum came under the first caresses before the strangler’s grip tightens around the victim’s throat. We were there to provide moral support and bear witness of this indignation.

Late last week the enemies of democracy—in their case, Boston Edison and Associated Industries of Massachusetts (recall that AIM was our deep-pockets court opponent in our 1996 payraise repeal effort, a shill for the Legislature) -- demanded a list of all the Campaign for Fair Electric Rates’s petitioners. Though Judge Hallissey, chairman of the SBLC, has ruled that it is not relevant whether petitioners are paid or volunteers—he nonetheless ordered the Coalition to provide its opponents with its list of petitioners!!!

It’s not enough for forces intent on strangling the life out of the people’s last resort just to chase off signers; now they are attempting to scare off petitioners as well. We decided the time and place was now to draw the line and stand with Jim, John and their petition if they should refuse to offer their throat to the strangler. If we had been ordered to do the same in the challenge against our petition, Barbara and I decided, we would have refused and walked out of the SBLC hearing! (A director of MassPIRG also was present and equally disgusted, and we’re hoping to draw in other grassroots groups like Common Cause, the Reform Party, the Libertarian Association, etc., who also have utilized the process.)

Tomorrow, Suffolk Superior Court Justice van Gestel will begin hearing oral arguments in our case brought by the teachers union to keep our "Promise" tax rollback off the ballot. The teachers union attorneys failed to meet court-ordered deadlines to provide lists of the signatures they intend to challenge, providing them days late; our attorney, Steve Epstein, will ask the court to dismiss their charges on those grounds.

Can you see what’s apparently happening here? They were late filing their list of challenged signatures, and now they’ve pulled out the stops in harassing signers. I smell desperation!

I believe Steve’s right. We’ve got’em, and -- *they know it!*

Watch for our News Release later today targeting the teachers union bullies’ unconscionable attack on the elderly.

Chip Ford—
______________________________________________________________

From the State House News Service:

ELECTRIC DEREG REPEAL BALLOT COMMISSION HEARINGS UNDERWAY
SHNS...TH.....APRIL 6, 1998....Lawyers for Boston Edison and Associated Industries of Massachusetts argued today that the state Ballot Law Commission should throw out a challenge to the state’s electric deregulation law because its sponsors used invalid petitions to gather 43,470 signatures. [*Note: 11,000 more than required! -- Chip*]

Former Assistant Attorney General Thomas Kiley, who is working for a Boston Edison employee, said because the Campaign for Fair Electric Rates didn’t use petitions with a summary of the repeal law at the absolute top of the page, all of CFER’s signatures are invalid.

The summary was printed below the words "Commonwealth of Massachusetts," and several lines of legal citations. While the state constitution requires the summary to be printed at "the top of the blank," the secretary of state’s office has long considered that to mean above the signing space provided.

Kiley also said voters could have been confused because CFER’s return address was either printed in a shaded box in the middle of the petition, or stamped with blue or pink ink along the side or in the middle of the sheet.

"The objectors contend that those signatures are constitutionally and statutorily infirm," Kiley said in his opening statement. "There was a potential for distraction."

Kiley argued that petition signers could have been further deceived by the slogan "Campaign for Fair Electric Rates," because they would not have understood the difference between the deregulation law and the ballot campaign to repeal it.

"This is nothing but a well-funded attempt to ensure that the public never gets to vote on this law," said CFER’s Jim Braude in response. "I would suggest this whole (challenge) is made up.

"It’s a return address on a piece of paper," a visibly frustrated Braude said at the lunchtime break. "If this was in a court of law, the challenge would have been thrown out in 30 seconds."

Braude said CFER was guilty of printing and stamping its return address on the petitions, but laughed off the thought that it might have confused people. In helping gather at least 400,000 signatures for a variety of ballot campaigns, Braude said no one ever complained that a return address was misleading.

Edison and AIM can block CFER’s repeal referendum from the ballot if they can prove at least 11,006 of the 43,470 signatures are invalid.

The ballot commission hearings are expected to continue tomorrow.
-------------------------------------------

Advances......April 3, 1998
STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE
Week of April 6, 1998
STATE HOUSE, BOSTON......Massachusetts legislators are geared up for this spring’s debate over how to spend $19.5 billion in the next fiscal year. The initial budget was proposed in late January by acting Gov. Paul Cellucci and the Legislative Branch will spend the next several months putting its own imprimatur on the Executive Branch’s spending plan. While the tug-of-war between those two branches is traditional, the third arm of government will be a major player in this year’s budget deliberations. The Judiciary will soon weigh in with rulings that may significantly alter the direction House and Senate leaders are now headed where taxes are concerned. State Supreme Judicial Court judges are now weighing arguments over whether voters in November should be allowed to decide how much they will pay in income taxes, and whether they should continue to pay tolls on the Massachusetts Turnpike. Both initiative petitions, should they appear on the ballot this fall and be approved by voters, would have a significant effect on the state’s finances. The proposal to drop the income tax rate from 5.95 percent to 5 percent would eventually take $1.2 billion out of circulation. Rather than lower the income tax, legislative leaders have proposed a different, and less costly, mix of tax cuts. The taxation petition is being challenged in Superior Court; meanwhile, legislators await news from the state Supreme Judicial Court as to whether the toll question will make it onto the November ballot. With voters most likely to approve the tax cut, the House and Senate would likely scrap their own tax reduction proposals and move to lower the income tax themselves.

BALLOT INITIATIVES.....Barbara Anderson and her tax-cut ballot initiative will be in Suffolk Superior Court, sitting in Middlesex, this Wednesday for oral arguments. Anderson is facing a challenge by the Massachusetts Teachers Association, who argue the state can’t afford a large tax cut. The hearing is slated for 2 pm Wednesday. John O’Connor’s electric deregulation repeal is also facing stiff competition, from the electric and manufacturing industries. Debate before the Ballot Law Commission, with the other side headed up by former Assistant Attorney General Thomas Kiley, gets underway at 10 am Monday at the McCormack Building. Kiley has indicated he will need only a few days to argue his challenge, which is mostly related to the campaign’s signature-gathering process, and not the individual signatures. The ballot commission has until April 15th to render a decision. On a higher note, the Supreme Judicial Court will hear arguments brought by backers of the Central Artery/Third Harbor Tunnel project against a ballot campaign to "Free the Pike" from tolls. The suit argues the Attorney General and Secretary of State were wrong to allow the petition to go forward because the Mass. Pike is an independent agency and not subject to ballot initiatives. CA/T supporters also say the state cannot afford to lose the toll-based revenue stream that is helping to pay for the massive project.
 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
You can e-mail A Promise to Keep: 5% at --> cltg@cltg.org
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *