In a welcome but widely unexpected move, Governor Brown has vetoed SB 168 — the state Democrat legislators’ slimy bill to all but outlaw the petition process for putting props and initiatives on the state and local ballots.
Gov. Brown Ignores the Weak Fraud Argument, Vetoes SB 168
By Joel Fox
Editor of Fox & Hounds and President of the Small Business Action Committee
Tue, August 2nd, 2011
Governor Jerry Brown did the right thing yesterday when he vetoed SB 168 by Sen. Ellen Corbett. The bill would have changed payment for helping to gather signature petitions from a per signature basis to a flat hourly rate. The change in the process would have made it more expensive to pay for signature gatherers, something Brown recognized would favor the wealthiest interests.
More importantly, Brown noted that the bill offered “a dramatic change” in California’s long established democratic process of direct democracy, which the governor knows the people respect and defend.
Some have conjectured that Brown, himself, is looking to the initiative process to raise taxes that the legislative process denied him and if SB 168 became law it would be more expensive for him to succeed. Perhaps. However, Brown’s time serving as California Secretary of State long ago also may have helped create the foundation for this veto.
One of the chief arguments made in favor of the bill was that the current system of paying per signature lends itself to fraud. Secretary of State Debra Bowen, who supported the bill, testified that between 1994 and 2010 there were 33 convictions for petition fraud.
The Bee newspapers, supporting the case for a veto, editorialized: “An average of three prosecutions yearly hardly seems like a crime spree.”
The Citizens in Charge Foundation recently issued a report on the petition fraud convictions claiming the Secretary of State overstated the number of convictions by a third. The Foundation also claimed that the fraud convictions had dropped 85% over the last decade.
Since, Jerry Brown served as California’s Secretary of State from 1971 to 1975, he would have a sense of the fraud that arises in such cases. True, Brown’s stint in office came before the initiative process became more frequently used in the 1980s. However, he would understand how rarely fraud occurred.
Brown chose not to use the flimsy case against fraud as an excuse to put obstacles in the path of the people’s right to petition their government.
Comments 4
Well…I have to say Good Job to that pesky Governor Brown. Your Dad will be proud of you this time as well.
Good, we don’t have to listen to those pesky “identity theft” commercials anymore. (If I have the right one, it was very confusing).
This just in from Evan McLaughlin, the political and legislative director for the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council, AFL-CIO. It contains a reference to DeMaio’s signature-gathering efforts, although he’s not named:
Big Business Campaigns’ Ramped Up Efforts Underscore Petition Drive Struggles
More Expensive Signature Bounties, Robo-Calls, Deceptive Tactics Show Petition Drives Are Struggling To Make Progress
SAN DIEGO – The ballot measure campaigns sponsored by big business have increased their per-signature bounty to $5 on a supposed “slam dunk” pension initiative, five times higher than when the campaign started.
This finding and other recent news illustrate a growing sense of desperation from the campaigns.
– Petition gatherers have been caught baiting shoppers to sign their petitions under the false pretense that signing will help “lower gas prices.” No such initiative is on file with the Secretary of State.
– At the San Diego Pride parade and festival last month, petition gatherers for the corporate campaigns asked passersby to sign petitions to make gay marriage legal in California. No such petition is on file with the Secretary of State.
– In addition to the five-fold increase in the bounty for the pension ballot measure, petitions for the ban on project labor agreements have doubled to $1.50 per signature.
– Petition gatherers have made misstatements about exempting firefighters (false), whether city employees receive Social Security (false), whether non-union workers are banned from working on city projects (yet again, false), and other important considerations about these ballot measures.
– Republican Councilmembers and their surrogates have held publicity stunts like “drive-thru” signature gatherings at Wal-Mart and placed robo-calls to voters asking them to sign the petition.
– Media accounts show these City of San Diego ballot measure campaigns have been asking patrons from other cities like La Mesa to sign their petitions in order to drive up their signature count.
The Just Say No campaign has been compiling video and audio footage of examples of where the petition drives have employed the aforementioned desperation tactics.
———————————————-
Interesting allegations. The Just Say No campaign should put all its video and audio evidence on its Web site so the media and public can judge.
Author
It’s funny to read a union hack’s PR complaining about an opposition petition campaign collecting bogus, invalid signatures — signatures that, if submitted, would help disqualify the opposition’s petition (as has happened recently).
In a recent petition push, there is anecdotal evidence that the labor unions were encouraging activists to sign the same petition several (different) times in an effort to disqualify it from being approved for the ballot.
Yes, some pro petition bozos (likely not locals) were collecting sigs for a San Diego petition from La Mesa residents. But since these sigs now go through a 100% verification process, the pros don’t get paid for such sigs — perhaps it’s the address and zip code that give it away.
An error? Yes? Dumb? Cheeecccckkkkk. But a desperate ploy by the petition honchos? Only in Evan’s wet dreams.