Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

The Tuesday Count: Mississippi voters to see dueling measures for the first time

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

January 20, 2015

Edited by Brittany Clingen

Tuesday Count-Checkmark.png

Donate.png

The Mississippi Legislature made history by referring a dueling measure to the ballot in response to a citizen initiative, a move some fear will lead to voter confusion at the ballot box. In Nevada, signature requirement challenges have complicated the progress of a local measure seeking to prevent a city subsidy for the construction of a soccer stadium.

Dueling measures to appear on Mississippi ballot:
For the first time in state history, the Mississippi Legislature chose to place a competing measure on the ballot in response to an initiative from citizens that is seeking to require the state government to establish, maintain and support "an adequate and efficient system of free public schools" and give the Mississippi Chancery Courts the power to enforce the amendment's mandate if the legislature fails to do so. Initiative 42 was certified for the November 2015 ballot on December 19, 2014, after supporters successfully collected and submitted 116,570 valid signatures, approximately 9,000 more than the number required.[1]

Less than a month later, legislators countered with their own version, Alternative 42, which, upon voter approval, would require the state legislature to establish, maintain and support "an effective system of free public schools upon such conditions and limitations as the Legislature may prescribe."[2] Unlike Initiative 42, Alternate 42 does not empower the judiciary to enforce the amendment's mandate, provide for "an adequate... system of free public schools," nor inscribe a "fundamental right to educational opportunity" for each child in the Mississippi Constitution.

"With HCR9, [the Alternative 42 measure,] focus is on educational output and accomplishments, not just funding for the sake of funding. The operative word in the alternative is effective. We want schools that are accomplishing something. We want schools that are effective," said State Speaker of the House Philip Gunn (R-56).[3]

Those who support Initiative 42 - and, therefore, oppose Alternative 42 - are concerned the dueling questions will confuse voters, potentially leading both measures to defeat at the ballot box. Come November, voters will first be asked whether they prefer "either measure" or "neither measure," and then whether they prefer Initiative 42 or Alternative 42. If a simple majority prefers “either measure,” then the amendment receiving a simple majority vote will become law.[4]

The Mississippi Legislature has never proposed a competing measure to an initiative, despite having the power to do so. According to House Education Committee Chairman John Moore (R-60), 2015 will be the first time legislators utilize this power.[5]

Local spotlight

City Subsidy of Las Vegas soccer stadium results in heated signature petition:

Rendering of proposed stadium; source: D.C. United

On December 17, 2014, Mayor Carolyn Goodman broke a tied city council decision, voting in favor of a proposal for the city to subsidize a proposed $200 million, 24,000-seat downtown soccer stadium for the team D.C. United. The deal requires the city to provide $25 million towards the stadium construction and $31.5 million for required infrastructure - a total of $56.5 million. The deal would also include the city handing over the 13-acre stadium site - valued at between $38 and $48 million - free of charge. Moreover, the city would be responsible for financing a bond issue with some of its contribution, thereby agreeing to future interest payments. The council members that opposed the project, led by Bob Beers, proposed a city-wide advisory vote on the issue, but the four stadium supporters on the city council shot down this idea. This spurred opponents of the city's involvement in the project to begin collecting signatures for a petition to put the stadium deal to a vote.[6][7]

At first Beers and his volunteers were told they needed only 2,306 signatures by the January 24 deadline, a number calculated from a percentage of those who voted in the last city election. Last week, however, city officials told petitioners that the city clerk had erred by basing the signature requirement on a primary election instead of the city's last general election, where voter turnout was higher. The city attorney informed Beers and his supporters that the requirement was actually a minimum of 8,258 signatures, nearly quadrupling the already difficult task. After receiving this news, Beers said that the group would look for a petition drive management contractor to supplement the work of the volunteers. Beers is also looking to challenge the new signature requirement figure. He claims that the law requires calculation based on the last city election, not the last general city election, making the original requirement the correct one.[8][9][10]

Other measures in the news

See also

2015 ballot measures
Tuesday Count2015 Scorecard

Footnotes