Ballot Law Update: Nebraska and Wyoming remove bans on pay-per-signature
April 9, 2015
By Josh Altic
As of April 8, at least 125 bills concerning ballot measure law were proposed or reconsidered during the 2015 legislative sessions of 37 states. Of the total, 111 were pending, five were approved, and nine had been defeated or abandoned. At least four more bills had passed through the state legislatures and merely awaited gubernatorial signatures for full approval. Most of the bills — 119 — were introduced this year, and the other six were carried over from the 2014 legislative session in New Jersey.
The changes in law proposed this year include efforts to make the initiative and referendum process more difficult, attempts to regulate campaign contributions and circulators, and bills that would establish the power of initiative in non-I&R states or make the power more accessible.
See "Changes in 2015 to laws governing ballot measures" for a periodically updated list of proposed ballot measure law changes organized by state. This page also includes a brief summary of each proposed bill, the status of the bill and links to more information.
Recent legislative news
Nebraska legislators encourage initiatives by voting to repeal the state's ban on pay-per-signature:
On April 7, 2015, Nebraska's unicameral legislature unanimously approved Legislative Bill 367, eliminating the state's seven-year-old ban on paying signature petition circulators based on the number of signatures collected. The bill is now awaiting only the signature of Gov. Pete Ricketts (R) before fully becoming law.[1]
Sen. Mike Groene (U-42), who authored the bill, explained that the state lawmakers had been engaged in a "civil war" with the voters ever since voters passed term limits on the legislature. He said that the ban on paying signature gatherers according to signatures collected made initiative petitions much more expensive and had “really broken the back of people trying to take part in their government through the petition process.” Groene, who made this bill one of his priorities in his first term in the Senate, said, “It’s time for this body to call a truce.”[1]
Sen. Paul Schumacher (U-22), who also supported LB 367, condemned the bill that first imposed the circulator pay restrictions in 2008 as “reflective of a government that was afraid of its people.”[1]
Sen. Schumacher sponsored another initiative-friendly law in Nebraska's 2015 legislative session, Legislative Bill 214, which was designed to allow electronic signatures to be used to qualify proposals for the ballot. As of April 7, 2015, the law was still on hold in the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee.[2]
Ballot Law changes enacted in Arkansas, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming:
The following ballot law changes were also approved by state legislatures and signed into law:
- Note: The timeline for approved bills becoming fully effective varies by state and bill.
- Arkansas House Bill 1688: This bill was designed "to Amend The Law Concerning Municipal Initiative And Referendum Petitions; And To Extend The Time For Circulation Of Municipal Initiative And Referendum Petitions."
- South Dakota Senate Bill 67: This bill was designed to "revise certain provisions regarding challenges to certain election petition signatures."
- Wyoming Senate File 49: This bill repealed the state's current laws governing the initiative process and replaced them with revised provisions. Notably, the bill removed state residency requirements and a prohibition against paying initiative signature gatherers based on the number of signatures collected. The prohibition against pay-per-signature circulators remained for referendum petitions.[3]
- Utah House Bill 107: This bill amended "the Election Code in relation to the definition of, and the requirements placed on, a political issues committee." Specifically, it exempts groups organized to support or oppose a single ballot proposition from the status of "political issue committee" and the rules governing such committees.
- Utah House Bill 120: This bill changed "the date on which certain filing entities are required to submit certain financial disclosures," including campaign finance disclosure filings for ballot issue committees and corporations that donate to ballot issue campaigns.
Court rulings
Federal court upholds California law requiring sponsors of initiatives to be identified on signature petition sheets:
Reversing a previous two-against-one court decision that said requiring identification violated rights to anonymous freedom of speech, a federal appeals court ruled in favor of California's law prohibiting initiative supporters from concealing their identities from voters deciding whether or not to sign a petition. Joshua White, who represented the League of California Cities, was happy with the decision. He said, “a person does not have any sort of First Amendment right to conceal his or her name from voters at a time when that information matters most, when the voter is asked to sign that initiative petition."[4]
The appeals court opinion also backed up the previous court's decision allowing California to continue to prevent corporations and organizations from sponsoring initiatives. State law requires initiative sponsors to be individual persons. The appellate judge panel confirmed that corporations cannot cast votes or be candidates for political office, and, likewise, they cannot have “a distinct, official role in the process of legislating, by initiative or otherwise.”[4]
See also
- Pay-per-signature
- Residency requirements for petition circulators
- Laws governing ballot measures in Arkansas
- Laws governing the initiative process in Nebraska
- Laws governing local ballot measures in California
- Laws governing local ballot measures in Utah
- Laws governing local ballot measures in Wyoming
- Laws governing local ballot measures in South Dakota
- Changes in 2015 to laws governing ballot measures
- Ballot measure law
- Previous Ballot Law Updates
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Citizens in Charge, "Nebraska Repeals Pay Ban, Not a Dissenting Vote," April 7, 2015
- ↑ Open States, "Legislative Bill 214," accessed April 7, 2015
- ↑ LegiScan, "Wyoming Senate File 49," accessed Aprail 7, 2015
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 San Francisco Chronicle, "Ballot-measure sponsors must be IDd, court affirms," April 3, 2015
| |||||
