Friday, April 5, 2013

The fight to protect the referendum in Arkansas

Posted By on Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 7:13 AM

I noted recently objections to the effort by Arkansas's duopoly casinos at Southland and Oaklawn, in league with their friend Attorney General Dustin McDaniel, to make the referendum process prohibitively difficult in Arkansas so as to discourage future casino amendments, along with other potential laws unpleasant to the business lobby.

The item, quoting Paul Jacob, a term limits and referendum crusader, drew a rejoinder from the Friday Law Firm, which challenged Jacob's representation of case law in favor of a vigorous referendum process. (Free speech restrictions are not the only potential problems with the casino/McDaniel effort to limit the process, by the way. The Arkansas Constitution also suggests problems with the proposed legislation.) The Friday firm cited some law favorable to a more restrictive approach. Their law would make it impossible to hire canvassers on a per-signature basis on state campaigns, the most efficient means of gathering signatures.

Jacob has responded with a lengthy note. In the hopes that an open-minded legislator might take a look (and might I say that, to date, Rep. Nate Bell of Mena has been a noteworthy advocate of preserving the referendum process), I reprint Jacob's note below. Following Jacob's note is a note, too, from David Couch, a Little Rock lawyer following the debate, who debunks an inadequate fiscal impact statement on this punitive measure:

Enjoyed your piece on our sending the federal court decision on the Colorado pay per signature case to representatives and emphasizing its bearing on SB 821. The Friday firm lawyer is absolutely correct that an 8th Circuit case back in 1999-2000 held a North Dakota pay per signature ban (and a residency requirement) to be constitutional in a challenge that indeed I was involved in, with U.S. Term Limits one of the plaintiffs.

But he misses the forest for the one thin tree standing on the North Dakota plains.

That North Dakota case has been largely discounted by other federal circuits and even by at least one federal district judge in the 8th Circuit (as you'll see below), because there was no evidence introduced to show the burden the law places on First Amendment activity. I take my share of the blame for not having put together a more thorough challenge way back then, but live and learn.

On the other hand, the recent Colorado case, which Citizens in Charge Foundation spent a good deal of time working on over the last three years, was exhaustively briefed with numerous depositions and reams of evidence and then an eight-day trial — something I’d never before experienced, having been in a lot of constitutional court challenges.

The judge’s findings of fact and his ruling striking down Colorado’s mere 20% limit on productivity based pay (i.e. the number of signatures gathered), based on such exhaustive evidence from experts across the country, provides a complete road-map to challenging the outright ban on such pay found in Sen. Ingram’s SB 821.

If Arkansas SB 821 passes, I’m confident all that evidence will be brought to a federal court in Arkansas. Moreover, those behind SB 821 will have to admit (a) they don't have a single verified case of fraud, i.e. no conviction of anyone for anything (because, inexplicably, no one has been charged and prosecuted), and more importantly, (b) they have no evidence whatsoever that per signature pay increases the incidence of fraud or that banning per signature pay reduces fraud.

Citizens in Charge Foundation did an open records study in all 26 initiative and referendum states, which found that, between 1998 and 2008, states which banned pay based on the number of signatures gathered had more verified fraud cases than states like Arkansas that allowed pay to petition circulators based on the number of signatures.

Care to guess the state with the most verified cases of actually prosecuted and convicted fraud? North Dakota! The state with restrictions on out-of-state circulators and pay per signature

Courts have admittedly been mixed on pay per signature. The Sixth Circuit has struck it down. The Ninth has joined the Eighth in upholding it, though again citing clearly in the written decision that had there been more evidence of any burden on the plaintiffs, the court would have used strict scrutiny and perhaps ruled differently. A ban on productively pay for petitioners was struck down in neighboring Mississippi a decade or so ago. It was upheld in Nebraska in, again, a badly evidenced and argued case.

As I mentioned above, that same North Dakota case upholding a productivity pay ban also found residency requirements for petitioners constitutional. Not only have three federal circuits found unanimously against residency in the last five years, but so did a federal judge in Nebraska recently.

Last year, the State of Nebraska paid our attorneys $250,000 to cover our legal fees when we won the case, Citizens in Charge v. Gale, overturning the state's residency requirement. Nebraska is in the 8th Circuit, too. Nonetheless, the federal judge ignored that North Dakota case, striking down Nebraska’s law. Then, the Nebraska AG thought so much of the North Dakota case’s precedent that he declined to appeal our victory to the 8th Circuit.

That speaks volumes about the legal precedent being relied upon for SB 821.

If SB 821 passes, in addition to effectively undermining our most fundamental political rights for a time, it will also undoubtedly cost the state money to defend. Including, before all is said and done, the cost of legal fees for the First Amendment attorney who takes the lawsuit to challenge and overturn SB 821 in federal court.

Arkansas has one of the best initiative and referendum systems in the country. I’d hate to see it undercut. And if it is, I’ll sure want to see it restored.

Sorry to be long-winded.

Best,PJ

FROM DAVID COUCH

Attached is the fiscal impact statement that was passed out at the committee hearing on Wednesday. As you can see it totally misses the mark. The only thing that they looked at was possible costs associated with imprisonment of people who may be convicted for violating the law. The big hidden costs in these bills are not addressed. This bill would require that the Board of Election Commissioners establish and provide a training program for paid canvassers which I assume would have to be statewide because I sincerely doubt that it would be fair to have someone from Lake Village or Bentonville come to Little Rock for training. This program is just not going to magically appear and operate and there will have to be materials associated with it and someone to administer it. It would also require that the secretary of state provide some type of “proof of registration” which would include a photo. The secretary of state is going to have to provide registration forms, keep a registration database and provide photo ID’s to these people at no charge because the constitution prohibits the state from charging someone to be a canvasser. If voter ID cards were going to cost the state $300,000 then here is another $300,000 arguably. SB821 is on the agenda today at 11. I don’t see where any amendments have been filed yet but I’m going and taking Paul Spencer with me just to keep an eye on these scoundrels. I agree with everything that Paul Jacob said in his email to you. I had the North Dakota case with me Wednesday in case the Friday Firm lawyers decided to tout the constitutionality of this obviously unconstitutional proposal.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Favorite

Speaking of...

Comments (3)

Showing 1-3 of 3

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-3 of 3

Add a comment

More by Max Brantley

  • An all-star open line

    Here's the Thursday open line and today's video roundup. Also a reminder to check this year's Arkansas Times Academic All-Star Team.
    • Apr 28, 2016
  • Critic asks Highway Department to tell truth: No park in 10-lane freeway plan

    A Little Rock developer and critic of the 10-lane freeway expansion for Interstate 30 says the HIghway Departemnt should make clear a park proposal it featured at a public hearing Tuesday night is only a pipe dream. It won't be part of their project.
    • Apr 28, 2016
  • More »

Readers also liked…

  • Statewide petition review completed

    The secretary of state's office has completed signature verification on statewide ballot initiatives. The final count shows both an alcohol amendment and minimum wage measure easily cleared the signature requirement.
    • Sep 9, 2014
  • What price football at Arkansas State University?

    Terry Mohajir, the athletic director at Arkansas State University, has not covered himself in glory in response to the matter of Christian crosses being made a part of uniform dress of the ASU football team this year.
    • Sep 11, 2014
  • Liquor stores contribute $1.2 million to fight alcohol sales

    If you didn't understand the specifics, you might find irony in the fact that Arkansas liquor stores have contributed $1.2 million — so far — to an effort to defeat a proposed constitutional amendment to allow retail alcohol sales in all 75 counties.
    • Sep 14, 2014

People who saved…

Most Shared

  • Finalists named in UALR chancellor search

    The University of Arkansas System has announced the three finalists in the search for a successor to Joel Anderson as chancellor of the University of Arkansas at Little Rock.
  • Post found at Parkin at UA for dating

    A portion of a post unearthed last week by Parkin Archeological State Park archeologist Dr. Jeff Mitchem was taken to the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville over the weekend for studies to determine whether it is actually the remains of a cross erected by DeSoto in 1542.
  • The top 20: Segregation of the affluent

    Thomas Edsall writes about the segregation — by education, geography and other markers — of the people in the top fifth of the income scale in the U.S. He quotes from a recent academic research paper:
  • 2016 All-Star nominees

    Here are the students nominated to be Academic All-Stars. They are listed by their hometowns, as indicated by mailing addresses.
  • Low tactics every day: Walmart education

    State Education Commissioner Johnny Key fired Baker Kurrus as Little Rock superintendent last week because he ventured off the reservation when he presented data to the state Board of Education on the damaging impact of charter schools on the district, which the state now runs. Kurrus was questioning proposed expansions of two charter schools already draining easier-to-educate children from the LRSD.

Most Viewed

  • LRSD advisory group calls for replacement Education Commissioner Johnny Key

    The Civic Advisory Committee of the Little Rock School District tonight approved a motion calling for the replacement of Education Commissioner Johnny Key, a halt to charter school expansions in the city and waivers to state education law, and a return of the district to local control.
  • 30 Crossing 3D videos assume more widening of I-30

    The 3D videos prepared by the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department to allow viewers to compare the 8-lane option for Interstate 30 to a 10-lane option (called 6+4 for various reasons by the AHTD, one of them possibly to get around requirement to get Metroplan to amend its 6-lane limit on I-30) show such a dramatic difference that I called the highway department's design build project engineer, Ben Browning, and asked why.
  • Finalists named in UALR chancellor search

    The University of Arkansas System has announced the three finalists in the search for a successor to Joel Anderson as chancellor of the University of Arkansas at Little Rock.
  • Critic asks Highway Department to tell truth: No park in 10-lane freeway plan

    A Little Rock developer and critic of the 10-lane freeway expansion for Interstate 30 says the HIghway Departemnt should make clear a park proposal it featured at a public hearing Tuesday night is only a pipe dream. It won't be part of their project.
  • Fight continues on Capitol Zoning Commission

    A Joint Budget vote is scheduled this morning and historic preservation groups have been lining up solidly to oppose the amendment proposed by Sen. Jeremy Hutchinson to kill the agency and transfer its work to the Arkansas Department of Heritage.

Most Recent Comments

  • Re: An all-star open line

    • Durango--if you get Postsecret by email you're missing the best part--photos of the actual cards…

    • on April 29, 2016
  • Re: You need this T-shirt

    • My people i bring to you good news, and this is my joy and happiness…

    • on April 28, 2016
  • Re: An all-star open line

    • Speaking of bullshit (there's so much out there it's leaking into my Uggs), I wish…

    • on April 28, 2016

Blogroll

Slideshows

 

© 2016 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation