Difference between revisions of "Pay-per-signature"
|Line 32:||Line 32:|
Revision as of 14:20, 27 March 2009
Several states have made it illegal to compensate petition circulators based on how many signatures they are able to collect on petitions. It is an active area of litigation.
Alaska Republicans move to ban
Alaska State Representatives Kyle Johansen (R-Ketchikan) and Charisse Millett (R-Anchorage) have introduced HB 36 in 2009 to make it illegal for initiative circulators to be paid on a per-signature basis. It would also make it illegal for initiative circulators to circulate more than one initiative at once.
Arizona legislature may ban
The Arizona Reform the Initiative Process Amendment (2010) has been proposed as a reform of Arizona's laws. One of its provisions if enacted would ban signature-gatherers from getting paid by signature or page.
Prete v. Bradbury
- Main article Prete v. Bradbury
Prete v. Bradbury is a lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon against Oregon Secretary of State Bill Bradbury challenging Oregon's restrictions on paying petition circulators by the signature.
The outcome of the lawsuit was that U.S. District Court Judge Ann Aiken, a Clinton appointee, upheld Oregon's ban on pay-per-signature on February 11, 2004. The ban was one of the provisions of Oregon Ballot Measure 26.
- Citizens for Tax Reform v. Deters
- On Our Terms '97 PAC v. Secretary of State of Maine
- Initiative & Referendum Institute v. Jaeger
- LIMIT v. Maleng
- Meyer v. Grant
- Term Limits Leadership Council v. Clark