Difference between revisions of "Distribution requirement"

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{law}}A '''distribution requirement''' is a legislative mandate requiring that petitions for a candidate or a ballot measure must be signed by voters from different political subdivisions in order for the candidate or ballot measure to be certified for the ballot.  A distribution requirement is a way of requiring that "widespread support" for the candidate or ballot measure be demonstrated via the evidence of registered voters from a variety of political subdivisions signing petitions for that candidate or ballot measure.
 
{{law}}A '''distribution requirement''' is a legislative mandate requiring that petitions for a candidate or a ballot measure must be signed by voters from different political subdivisions in order for the candidate or ballot measure to be certified for the ballot.  A distribution requirement is a way of requiring that "widespread support" for the candidate or ballot measure be demonstrated via the evidence of registered voters from a variety of political subdivisions signing petitions for that candidate or ballot measure.
  
'''States with distribution requirements are:'''
+
==States with distribution requirements==
  
 
*[[Alaska signature requirements|Alaska]].  Signatures from each of 30 districts to be at least equal to seven percent of the voters who voted in each of these districts in the last general election.  An older requirement, changed with the passage in 2004 of the [[Alaska Distribution Requirement for Initiatives (2004)|Distribution Requirement for Initiatives Act]] in 2004, was that at least one voter needed to sign from each of at least 27 districts.
 
*[[Alaska signature requirements|Alaska]].  Signatures from each of 30 districts to be at least equal to seven percent of the voters who voted in each of these districts in the last general election.  An older requirement, changed with the passage in 2004 of the [[Alaska Distribution Requirement for Initiatives (2004)|Distribution Requirement for Initiatives Act]] in 2004, was that at least one voter needed to sign from each of at least 27 districts.
Line 27: Line 27:
 
*[[Laws governing the initiative process in Wyoming|Wyoming]].  15% of total votes cast in the last election from at least 2/3 of the counties.  If [[Wyoming Constitutional Amendment B (2008)]] passes, the new requirement will be 15% of votes cast in the last election from 2/3rds of the state's thirty state senate districts.
 
*[[Laws governing the initiative process in Wyoming|Wyoming]].  15% of total votes cast in the last election from at least 2/3 of the counties.  If [[Wyoming Constitutional Amendment B (2008)]] passes, the new requirement will be 15% of votes cast in the last election from 2/3rds of the state's thirty state senate districts.
  
'''States without distribution requirements are:'''
+
==States without distribution requirements==
  
*[[Arizona Initiative and Referendum Law|Arizona]], [[California Initiative and Referendum Law|California]], [[Colorado Initiative and Referendum Law|Colorado]], [[Idaho Initiative and Referendum Law|Idaho]], [[Maine Initiative and Referendum Law|Maine]], [[Michigan Initiative and Referendum Law|Michigan]], [[North Dakota Initiative and Referendum Law|North Dakota]], [[Oklahoma Initiative and Referendum Law|Oklahoma]], [[Oregon Initiative and Referendum Law|Oregon]], [[South Dakota Initiative and Referendum Law|South Dakota]] and [[Laws governing the initiative process in Washington|Washington]].
+
*[[Arizona Initiative and Referendum Law|Arizona]], [[California Initiative and Referendum Law|California]], [[Colorado Initiative and Referendum Law|Colorado]], [[Idaho Initiative and Referendum Law|Idaho]], [[Maine Initiative and Referendum Law|Maine]], [[Michigan Initiative and Referendum Law|Michigan]], [[Laws governing the initiative process in Nevada|Nevada]], [[North Dakota Initiative and Referendum Law|North Dakota]], [[Oklahoma Initiative and Referendum Law|Oklahoma]], [[Oregon Initiative and Referendum Law|Oregon]], [[South Dakota Initiative and Referendum Law|South Dakota]] and [[Laws governing the initiative process in Washington|Washington]].
  
 
==Legal challenges to distribution requirements==
 
==Legal challenges to distribution requirements==

Revision as of 11:36, 2 October 2008

Ballot law
BallotLaw final.png
State laws
Initiative law
Recall law
Statutory changes
Court cases
Lawsuit news
Ballot access rulings
Recent court cases
Petitioner access
Ballot title challenges
Superseding initiatives
Signature challenges
Laws governing
local ballot measures
A distribution requirement is a legislative mandate requiring that petitions for a candidate or a ballot measure must be signed by voters from different political subdivisions in order for the candidate or ballot measure to be certified for the ballot. A distribution requirement is a way of requiring that "widespread support" for the candidate or ballot measure be demonstrated via the evidence of registered voters from a variety of political subdivisions signing petitions for that candidate or ballot measure.

States with distribution requirements

  • Alaska. Signatures from each of 30 districts to be at least equal to seven percent of the voters who voted in each of these districts in the last general election. An older requirement, changed with the passage in 2004 of the Distribution Requirement for Initiatives Act in 2004, was that at least one voter needed to sign from each of at least 27 districts.
  • Florida. 8% in 12 of 23 congressional districts.
  • Maryland. No more than half of required signatures may be from any one county or Baltimore City.
  • Massachusetts. No more than one-quarter of the certified signatures may come from any one county.
  • Missouri. Sponsors must collect a minimum threshold of signatures in 6 out of Missouri's 9 U.S. congressional districts.
  • Montana. For a statute, 5% in 34 of 50 legislative districts. For an amendment, 10% in 40 out of the 50 state legislative districts.
  • Nebraska. In Nebraska, signatures over a threshold determined by whether the petition is for a statute or a constitutional amendment must be collected in a minimum of 40% (or 38) of Nebraska's 93 counties.
  • Ohio. In Ohio, signatures for both amendments and statutes must be obtained from at least 44 of the 88 counties of the state.
  • Utah. For direct initiatives, proponents must gather 10% of the vote cast in at least 20 of Utah's 29 counties. For indirect initiatives, proponents must gather 5% in at least 20 of 29 counties.
  • Wyoming. 15% of total votes cast in the last election from at least 2/3 of the counties. If Wyoming Constitutional Amendment B (2008) passes, the new requirement will be 15% of votes cast in the last election from 2/3rds of the state's thirty state senate districts.

States without distribution requirements

Legal challenges to distribution requirements

  • In 1969, in the case of Moore v. Ogilvie, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down an Illinois distribution requirement saying that it "applies a rigid, arbitrary formula to sparsely settled counties and populous counties alike, and thus discriminates against the residents of the populous counties in the exercise of their political rights in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."
  • In 2002, in the case of Gallivan v. Walker, the Utah Supreme Court struck down Utah's distribution requirement, declaring that the initiative right is a "fundamental right implicit in a free society" and that the distribution requirement impinged on it.
  • In the 2005 federal court case Montana PIRG v. Johnson, a distribution requirement in Montana was declared unconstitutional.

Petition sponsors in states with distribution requirements face the difficult decision of whether to comply with a requirement that may be unconstitutional, or filing a federal lawsuit. Since the costs of such litigation can easily exceed $100,000, and since the litigation might take years, as a practical matter, most petition sponsors elect to comply with a law that may be unconstitutional.

See also

References

  1. Mercury News, "Federal judge strikes down Nev. ballot measure law", September 29, 2008
  2. Las Vegas Review Journal, "EDITORIAL: Petition requirements", October 2, 2008

LawsAccessBadgesBallot title issuesChangesDeadlinesDefining a signatureDistributionPay restrictionsResidencySignature numbersSingle subject