Read the State Legislative Tracker. New edition available now!

Difference between revisions of "Oregon Prohibition of Payment Per Signature for Canvassers, Measure 26 (2002)"

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m (External Links)
m (Text replace - ""," to ","")
 
(21 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Oregon Ballot Measure 26 (2002)''' is an [[initiated constitutional amendment]] that
+
<table style="float: right;">
prohibits [[chief petitioner]]s of [[initiative]] campaigns in [[Oregon]] from paying [[circulator|petition circulators]] on a per-signature basis either directly or indirectly.
+
<tr valign="top">
 +
<td>
 +
{{tnr}}
 +
</td>
 +
<td>
 +
{{Labor and unions}}
 +
{{ORConstitution}}
 +
</td>
 +
</tr>
 +
</table>
  
 +
The '''Oregon Prohibition of Payment Per Signature for Canvassers Amendment''', also known as '''Measure 26''', was on the [[2002 ballot measures#Oregon|November 5, 2002 ballot]] in [[Oregon]] as an {{issfull}}, where it was '''approved'''. The measure made deemed unlawful the payment of canvassers by the number of signatures collected for initiative and referendum petitions.<ref name=voters>[http://library.state.or.us/repository/2010/201003011350161/ORVPGenMari2002m.pdf ''Oregon State Library'', "State of Oregon Official Voters' Pamphlet," accessed December 17, 2013]</ref>
  
==Official Ballot Title==
+
==Election results==
 +
{{short outcome
 +
|title=Oregon Measure 26 (2002)
 +
|yes=921,606
 +
|yespct=75.35
 +
|no=301,415
 +
|nopct=24.65
 +
}}
 +
Election results via: [http://bluebook.state.or.us/state/elections/elections22a.htm Oregon Blue Book]
 +
 
 +
==Text of the measure==
 
''Prohibits Payment, Receipt Of Payment Based On The Number Of Initiative, Referendum Petition Signatures Obtained''<ref>[http://egov.sos.state.or.us/elec/web_irr_search.record_detail?p_reference=20020143..QSCYYY. Detailed information on this initiative from the Secretary of State]</ref>
 
''Prohibits Payment, Receipt Of Payment Based On The Number Of Initiative, Referendum Petition Signatures Obtained''<ref>[http://egov.sos.state.or.us/elec/web_irr_search.record_detail?p_reference=20020143..QSCYYY. Detailed information on this initiative from the Secretary of State]</ref>
  
 +
==Support==
 +
'''Oregon [[AFL-CIO]]''', [[Our Oregon]], and others argued that the measure would prevent incentive for fraud or forgery when collecting petition signatures.<ref>[http://www.blueoregon.com/2006/02/measure_26_uphe.html ''Measure 26 Upheld by Ninth Circuit'', Oregon AFL-CIO's Statement, posted by Blue Oregon]</ref>
  
==Results==
+
==Opposition==
This measure '''passed''' at the November 2002 General Election with 921,606 voters in favor, and 301,415 opposed.
+
Those opposed to the measure argued that paying-per-signature is the most efficient way to collect signatures and that the new law would violate free speech rights in the first amendment.  
  
 +
==''Prete v. Bradbury''==
  
==Measure challenged==
+
In 2004, [[Barbara and Eugene Prete]] filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the ban on paying circulators per signature.<ref>[http://www.ballot-access.org/2004/0301.html#10 Ballot Access News Edited by Richard Winger, March 1, 2004]</ref>  Their lawsuit was heard by U.S. District Court Judge Ann Aiken, a Clinton appointee, who upheld the ban.  The Pretes appealed Aiken's decision to the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit]] in the case of [[Prete v. Bradbury]] in 2006. The court of appeals upheld the lower court's ruling.<ref>[http://www.iandrinstitute.org/REPORT%202006-1%20Paid%20Petitioners.pdf ''Paid Petitioners after Prete'' by Andrew M. Gloger, I&R Institute, University of Southern California]</ref>
 
+
In 2004, [[Barbara and Eugene Prete]] filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the ban on paying circulators per signature.<ref>[http://www.ballot-access.org/2004/0301.html#10 Ballot Access News Edited by Richard Winger, March 1 2004]</ref>  Their lawsuit was heard by U.S. District Court Judge Ann Aiken, a Clinton appointee, who upheld the ban.  The Pretes appealed Aiken's decision to the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit]] in the case of [[Prete v. Bradbury]] in 2006. The court of appeals upheld the lower court's ruling. <ref>[http://www.iandrinstitute.org/REPORT%202006-1%20Paid%20Petitioners.pdf ''Paid Petitioners after Prete'' by Andrew M. Gloger, I&R Institute, University of Southern California]</ref>
+
 
+
 
+
==References==
+
<references/>
+
  
 
==See also==
 
==See also==
*[[Prete v. Bradbury]]
+
{{submit a link}}
 
*[[Oregon 2002 ballot measures]]
 
*[[Oregon 2002 ballot measures]]
 +
*[[2002 ballot measures]]
 
*[[List of Oregon ballot measures]]
 
*[[List of Oregon ballot measures]]
*[[Laws governing petition circulators]]
+
*[[History of Initiative & Referendum in Oregon]]<br>
*[[Procedures for qualifying an initiative in Oregon]]
+
 
*[[Laws governing the initiative process in Oregon]]
+
==External links==
 +
*[http://bluebook.state.or.us/state/elections/elections22a.htm Oregon Blue Book Initiative, Referendum and Recall: 2000-2004]
 +
*[http://bluebook.state.or.us/state/constitution/constitution.htm Oregon State Constitution]
 +
*[http://library.state.or.us/repository/2010/201003011350161/ORVPGenMari2002m.pdf Oregon Official Voters' Pamphlet November November 2002]
 +
 
 +
==References==
 +
{{reflist}}
  
[[Category:Oregon]]
+
{{2002 ballot measures}}
[[Category:Oregon ballot measures]]
+
{{Oregon}}
[[Category:2002 ballot measures]]
+
  
[[Category:Oregon]]
+
[[Category:Oregon 2002 ballot measures]]
[[Category:Oregon ballot measures]]
+
[[Category:Labor and unions, Oregon]]
[[Category:2002 ballot measures]]
+
[[Category:Labor and unions, 2002]]
 +
[[Category:Direct democracy measures, Oregon]]
 +
[[Category:Direct democracy measures, 2002]]
 +
{{hbm text}}

Latest revision as of 07:47, 21 March 2014

Voting on Labor and Unions
Labor and unions.jpg
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Oregon Constitution
Flag of Oregon.png
Articles
PreambleIIIIIIIVVVIVIIVIIIIXXX-AXIXI-AXI-BXI-CXI-DXI-EXI-F(1)XI-F(2)XI-GXI-HXI-I(1)XI-I(2)XI-JXI-KXI-LXI-MXI-NXI-OXI-PXIIXIIIXIVXVXVIXVIIXVIII

The Oregon Prohibition of Payment Per Signature for Canvassers Amendment, also known as Measure 26, was on the November 5, 2002 ballot in Oregon as an initiated state statute, where it was approved. The measure made deemed unlawful the payment of canvassers by the number of signatures collected for initiative and referendum petitions.[1]

Election results

Oregon Measure 26 (2002)
ResultVotesPercentage
Approveda Yes 921,606 75.35%
No301,41524.65%

Election results via: Oregon Blue Book

Text of the measure

Prohibits Payment, Receipt Of Payment Based On The Number Of Initiative, Referendum Petition Signatures Obtained[2]

Support

Oregon AFL-CIO, Our Oregon, and others argued that the measure would prevent incentive for fraud or forgery when collecting petition signatures.[3]

Opposition

Those opposed to the measure argued that paying-per-signature is the most efficient way to collect signatures and that the new law would violate free speech rights in the first amendment.

Prete v. Bradbury

In 2004, Barbara and Eugene Prete filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the ban on paying circulators per signature.[4] Their lawsuit was heard by U.S. District Court Judge Ann Aiken, a Clinton appointee, who upheld the ban. The Pretes appealed Aiken's decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the case of Prete v. Bradbury in 2006. The court of appeals upheld the lower court's ruling.[5]

See also

BP-Initials-UPDATED.png
Suggest a link

External links

References


BallotMeasureFinal badge.png
This historical ballot measure article requires that the text of the measure be added to the page.