February 15, 2013

By Eric Veram

SACRAMENTO, California: According to reports, California Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg has several initiative reforms in the works and may unveil some of them by the end of February.

One proposed reform would involve removing the current requirement of a two-thirds majority to place tax increases on the ballot. Another proposed reform is re-instigating a process known as “indirect initiative.” This form of initiative would allow the state legislature to amend initiatives or pass their own versions if the measures’ proponents agree to it. Sources have also mentioned a possible proposal to restrict the current trend of high-donor financing of ballot measures. Supporters of the reforms say that they would make the initiative process more streamlined and would create a better process for passing state budgets.^[1][2]

Stay up-to-date on ballot law developments with the weekly Tuesday Count and monthly Ballot Law Update.

By Ballotpedia’s Congressional team

MADISON, Wisconsin: California had 53 U.S. House seats on the ballot in 2012. A total of 46 incumbents sought re-election on November 6, 2012, with 39 of them being successfully re-elected.

The following incumbents lost in the general election:

• District 7 Republican incumbent Dan Lungren was defeated by Ami Bera (D) in the general election.
• District 15 Pete Stark (D) was defeated by Eric Swalwell (D) in the general election.
• District 30 Howard Berman (D) was defeated by fellow Democratic incumbent Brad Sherman in one of the most heated same-party battles of the year.
• District 35 Democratic incumbent Joe Baca was defeated by Gloria Negrete McLeod (D).
• District 36 Incumbent Mary Bono Mack (D) was defeated by Democratic challenger Raul Ruiz.
• District 44 Laura Richardson (D) was defeated by fellow Democratic incumbent Janice Hahn.
• District 52 Incumbent Brian Bilbray (R) was defeated by Scott Peters (D).

As a result of the election, Democrats picked up four U.S. House seats in California.

Here are the candidates who won election from California.

District	General Election Candidates	Incumbent	2012 Winner	Partisan Switch?
1st	Jim Reed  Doug La Malfa	Mike Thompson	Doug La Malfa	Yes
2nd	Jared Huffman  Daniel Roberts	Wally Herger	Jared Huffman	Yes
3rd	John Garamendi  Kim Dolbow Vann	Dan Lungren	John Garamendi	Yes
4th	Jack Uppal  Tom McClintock	Tom McClintock	Tom McClintock	No
5th	Mike Thompson  Randy Loftin	Doris Matsui	Mike Thompson	No
6th	Doris Matsui  Joseph McCray, Sr.	Lynn Woolsey	Doris Matsui	No
7th	Ami Bera Dan Lungren	George Miller	Ami Bera	Yes
8th	Paul Cook  Gregg Imus	Nancy Pelosi	Paul Cook	Yes
9th	Jerry McNerney  Ricky Gill	Barbara Lee	Jerry McNerney	No
10th	Jose Hernandez  Jeff Denham	John Garamendi	Jeff Denham	Yes
11th	George Miller  Virginia Fuller	Jerry McNerney	George Miller	No
12th	Nancy Pelosi  John Dennis	Jackie Speier	Nancy Pelosi	No
13th	Barbara Lee  Marilyn Singleton	Pete Stark	Barbara Lee	No
14th	Jackie Speier  Deborah Bacigalupi	Anna Eshoo	Jackie Speier	No
15th	Pete Stark  Eric Swalwell	Mike Honda	Eric Swalwell	No
16th	Jim Costa Brian Daniel Whelan	Zoe Lofgren	Jim Costa	No
17th	Mike Honda  Evelyn Li	Sam Farr	Mike Honda	No
18th	Anna Eshoo  Dave Chapman	Dennis Cardoza	Anna Eshoo	No
19th	Zoe Lofgren  Robert Murray	Jeff Denham	Zoe Lofgren	Yes
20th	Sam Farr  Jeff Taylor	Jim Costa	Sam Farr	No
21st	John Hernandez  David Valadao	Devin Nunes	David Valadao	No
22nd	Otto Lee  Devin Nunes	Kevin McCarthy	Devin Nunes	No
23rd	Kevin McCarthy  Terry Phillips	Lois Capps	Kevin McCarthy	Yes
24th	Lois Capps  Abel Maldonado	Elton Gallegly	Lois Capps	Yes
25th	Lee Rogers Howard McKeon	Howard McKeon	Howard McKeon	No
26th	Julia Brownley  Tony Strickland	David Dreier	Julia Brownley	Yes
27th	Judy Chu Jack Orswell	Brad Sherman	Judy Chu	No
28th	Adam Schiff  Phil Jennerjahn	Howard Berman	Adam Schiff	No
29th	Tony Cardenas  David Hernandez	Adam Schiff	Tony Cardenas	No
30th	Howard Berman  Brad Sherman	Henry Waxman	Brad Sherman	No
31st	Bob Dutton  Gary Miller	Xavier Becerra	Gary Miller	Yes
32nd	Grace Napolitano  David Miller	Judy Chu	Grace Napolitano	No
33rd	Henry Waxman  Bill Bloomfield	Karen Bass	Henry Waxman	No
34th	Xavier Becerra  Stephen Smith	Lucille Roybal-Allard	Xavier Becerra	No
35th	Joe Baca  Gloria Negrete McLeod	Maxine Waters	Gloria Negrete McLeod	No
36th	Raul Ruiz Mary Bono Mack	Janice Hahn	Raul Ruiz	No
37th	Karen Bass  Morgan Osborne	Laura Richardson	Karen Bass	No
38th	Linda Sanchez  Benjamin Campos	Grace Napolitano	Linda Sanchez	No
39th	Jay Chen  Edward R. Royce	Linda Sanchez	Edward R. Royce	Yes
40th	Lucille Roybal-Allard  David Sanchez	Edward Royce	Lucille Roybal-Allard	Yes
41st	Mark Takano  John Tavaglione	Jerry Lewis	Mark Takano	Yes
42nd	Michael Williamson  Ken Calvert	Gary Miller	Ken Calvert	No
43rd	Bob Flores  Maxine Waters	Joe Baca	Maxine Waters	No
44th	Janice Hahn Laura Richardson	Ken Calvert	Janice Hahn	Yes
45th	Sukhee Kang  John Campbell	Mary Bono Mack	John Campbell	No
46th	Loretta Sanchez Jerry Hayden	Dana Rohrabacher	Loretta Sanchez	Yes
47th	Alan Lowenthal  Gary DeLong	Loretta Sanchez	Alan Lowenthal	No
48th	Ron Varasteh  Dana Rohrabacher	John Campbell	Dana Rohrabacher	No
49th	Jerry Tetalman  Darrell Issa	Darrell Issa	Darrell Issa	No
50th	David Secor  Duncan Hunter	Brian Bilbray	Duncan Hunter	No
51st	Juan Vargas  Michael Crimmins	Bob Filner	Juan Vargas	No
52nd	Scott Peters  Brian Bilbray	Duncan Hunter	Scott Peters	Yes
53rd	Susan Davis  Nick Popaditch	Susan Davis	Susan Davis	No

[edit]National picture

Both chambers of the United States Congress remain split after the November 6, 2012 election. Democrats increased their majority in the U.S. Senate while cutting into the Republicans majority in theU.S. House. Of the 435 candidates who won election to the U.S. House, 85 of them were challengers, which represents 19.5 percent of U.S. House members. Of those 85, 50 are Democratic and 35 are Republican. A total of 27 incumbents were defeated — 10 Democratic and 17 Republican.

November 6, 2012

By Josh Altic

SACRAMENTO, California: Eleven ballot measure was on the California 2012 ballot on November 6, with voters casting their decisions on the issues. The results below are from the California Secretary of State as of November 7, 2012 at 2:03 a.m. PST with 79.6% ( 19,494 of 24,491 ) precincts partially reporting. For daily updates on the results of the California Proposition races until the final results have been certified follow Ballotpedia’s article on the California 2012 election ballot and the articles on each proposition featured there.

Out of the 11 measures on the ballot, 5 were approved, and 6 were defeated.

Below is a rundown of results for each of the eleven propositions on the ballot.

Proposition 30

This initiated constitutional amendment increased sales and income taxes to provide additional revenue for the general fund and for education.

Proposition 30 was narrowly approved by California voters. Of the ballots counted in 19,494 precincts so far 53.3% approved the tax increases and 46.7% voted no. Election results are not yet official, as a canvassing of the results will not be done until later this month.

Proposition 31

Proposition 31 would have:

• Established a two-year state budget cycle
• Prohibited the California State Legislature from “creating expenditures of more than $25 million unless offsetting revenues or spending cuts are identified.”
• Permitted the Governor of California to cut the budget unilaterally during declared fiscal emergencies if the state legislature fails to act.
• Required performance reviews of all state programs.
• Required performance goals in state and local budgets.
• Required publication of all bills at least three days prior to a vote by the California State Senate or California State Assembly.
• Given counties the power to alter state statutes or regulations related to spending unless the state legislature or a state agency vetoes those changes within 60 days.

. According to the California’s Secretary of State’s website, Proposition 31 was decisively defeated with 60.2% voting no and 39.8% voting yes. Election results are not yet official, as a canvassing of the results will not be done until later this month.

Proposition 32

Prop 32, an initiated state statute, would have:

• Ban both corporate and union contributions to state and local candidates.
• Ban contributions by government contractors to the politicians who control contracts awarded to them.
• Ban automatic deductions by corporations, unions, and government of employees’ wages to be used for politics.

California’s Secretary of State’s website shows Proposition 32 rejected by 55.4% of voters, with 44.6% voting yes. Election results are not yet official, as a canvassing of the results will not be done until later this month.

Stay tuned for more developments on Ballotpedia’s page for California 2012 ballot measures.

Proposition 33

Proposition 33 sought to allow insurers to set prices based on whether the driver previously carried insurance coverage with any insurance company. Insurers, if this prop passed, would have been able to offer discounts to new customers who can prove they were continuously covered by any licensed auto insurance company over the previous five years. Insurers would have been able to increase the cost of insurance to drivers who have not maintained continuous coverage. These discounts are known as “persistency discounts” or “loyalty discounts” and under current California law, insurance companies can only offer them to existing customers..

According to the California’s Secretary of State’s website, Proposition 33 was defeated with 45.6% voting yes and 54.4% voting no. Election results are not yet official, as a canvassing of the results will not be done until later this month.

Stay tuned for more developments on Ballotpedia’s page for California 2012 ballot measures.

Proposition 34

This measure would have eliminated the death penalty in California and replaced it with life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Election results from the California Secretary of State website say that Proposition 34 was defeated. 46.7% voted yes and 53.3% voted no, making the race a close one. Election results are not yet official, as a canvassing of the results will not be done until later this month.

Stay tuned for more developments on Ballotpedia’s page for California 2012 ballot measures.

Proposition 35

This initiated state statute sought to:

• Increase prison terms for human traffickers.
• Require convicted sex traffickers to register as sex offenders.
• Require all registered sex offenders to disclose their internet accounts.
• Require criminal fines from convicted human traffickers to pay for services to help victims.
• Mandate law enforcement training on human trafficking.

According to the California’s Secretary of State’s website Proposition 35 was overwhelmingly approved, with a supermajority of 81.4% voting yes and 18.6% voting no. Election results are not yet official, as a canvassing of the results will not be done until later this month.

Proposition 36

Prop. 36, the initiated state statute changing the criminal law of California, sought to:

• Revise the three strikes law to impose life sentence only when the new felony conviction is “serious or violent”.
• Authorize re-sentencing for offenders currently serving life sentences if their third strike conviction was not serious or violent and if the judge determines that the re-sentence does not pose unreasonable risk to public safety.
• Continue to impose a life sentence penalty if the third strike conviction was for “certain non-serious, non-violent sex or drug offenses or involved firearm possession”.
• Maintain the life sentence penalty for felons with “non-serious, non-violent third strike if prior convictions were for rape, murder, or child molestation.”

Proposition 36 was passed, according to the California Secretary of State website, being approved by 68.6% of voters and rejected by 31.4%. Election results are not yet official, as a canvassing of the results will not be done until later this month.

Stay tuned for more developments on Ballotpedia’s page for California 2012 ballot measures.

Proposition 37

This food related initiated state statute establishes the following:

• Requires labeling on raw or processed food offered for sale to consumers if the food is made from plants or animals with genetic material changed in specified ways.
• Prohibits labeling or advertising such food as “natural.”
• Exempts from this requirement foods that are “certified organic; unintentionally produced with genetically engineered material; made from animals fed or injected with genetically engineered material but not genetically engineered themselves; processed with or containing only small amounts of genetically engineered ingredients; administered for treatment of medical conditions; sold for immediate consumption such as in a restaurant; or alcoholic beverages.”

. Proposition 37 was defeated by a fairly narrow margin of less than eight percent with 46.3% voting yes and 53.7% voting no. Election results are not yet official, as a canvassing of the results will not be done until later this month.

Proposition 38

This Proposition, one of the nine initiated state statutes on the California ballot, would have increased state income tax to support education.

Voters were opposed to this income tax increase, According to the California’s Secretary of State’s website, which shows Prop. 38 defeated by a fairly substantial margin. 72.7% of electors voted no and 27.3% voted yes. Election results are not yet official, as a canvassing of the results will not be done until later this month.

Ballotpedia’s page for California 2012 ballot measures has more information and will be updated with further developments.

Proposition 39

This statewide proposition increased state income taxes, adding possibly $1 billion to the state’s revenue and creating approximately 40,000 construction and clean energy jobs, according to the non-partisan California Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Initially, this extra revenue would fund green energy projects, construction projects, public schools, and boost the state’s general fund.

For further information on the details of this proposition see Ballotpedia’s article on Proposition 39.

According to the California’s Secretary of State’s website, Proposition 39 was approved by 59.7% of voters, while 40.3% voted no. Election results are not yet official, as a canvassing of the results will not be done until later this month.

Stay tuned for more developments on Ballotpedia’s page for California 2012 ballot measures.

Proposition 40

A “yes” vote on this veto referendum is a vote to maintain intact the work of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, while a “no” vote is a vote to overturn the commission’s redistricting lines.

The Commission was supported by voters in this election, as the decision to maintain its work made by the 72.0% of the electors who voted yes for Prop. 40. Only 28.0% voted no. Election results are not yet official, as a canvassing of the results will not be done until later this month.

Stay tuned for more developments on Ballotpedia’s page for California 2012 ballot measures.

October 10, 2012

As California’s newspapers weigh in with their editorial endorsements on the state’s November 6 ballot propositions, patterns are beginning to emerge. Ballotpedia has tracked 27 newspapers. These newspapers have cumulatively made 201 editorial endorsements of the eleven statewide ballot propositions on the November 6, 2012 ballot. Some of the newspapers have not yet weighed in on all eleven propositions; if and when they do, that will be a total of 297 endorsements. The 201 editorial endorsements made thus far represents 67.68% of the total number of endorsements that might ultimately be made, if each of the 27 newspapers states an opinion on each of the eleven ballot propositions.

Not surprisingly, Proposition 40 is the proposition that earns the highest degree of support from the state’s editorial writers. Twenty of them say “yes”, while no newspaper has yet weighed in with a “no” suggestion. Even the group that got the signatures to put Proposition 40 on the ballot has changed their mind about it.

Among propositions where there is a genuine contest, Proposition 36, which will change the state’s “Three Strikes” law, is the most popular with the state’s newspaper editorial boards. It has been given a “Vote Yes!” signal from eighteen newspapers, while only two think voters should reject it.

Meanwhile, Proposition 37, which would require that genetically engineered foods be labeled, is the least popular proposition with newspaper editorial boards. Nineteen of them say “No!”, while three say “yes”.

August 16, 2012

By Tyler King

MADISON, Wisconsin: California’s legislative elections in 2012 are more competitive than most of the country, based on Ballotpedia’s Competitiveness index which captures the extent of electoral competitiveness exhibited in state legislative elections.

About the Competitiveness index:
The Ballotpedia state legislative competitive index looks at three factors: is the incumbent running for re-election in a district; if so, does he or she draw a primary challenge; and are there two major party candidates in the general election.

Ballotpedia’s index is created by summing the three percentages and then dividing by three. Each state is given 1 point for each percentage. Then, the points are added up and divided by three to establish the index rating. 1 is least competitive and 100 equals most competitive.

The comprehensive 2012 state legislative competitive index will be released following the completion of the primaries in all 44 states with 2012 state legislative elections. It will examine all 6,016 state legislative seats that are up for election on November 6, 2012.

Once a state releases official primary candidate lists, Ballotpedia staff analyzes the data to determine primary competitiveness. Just one state remains that has passed their filing deadline, but has not been analyzed by Ballotpedia staff – New York.

California in 2012:
California’s filing deadline was on March 9, 2012. It was the 11th state to be analyzed by Ballotpedia staff and the inclusion of its data brought the national index to 36.00 in 2012.

In California, there are 100 total state legislative seats with elections in 2012 and most current incumbents are seeking re-election.

Of those 100, 20 are State Senate seats and 80 are State House seats. A total of 56 incumbents (56.0%) are seeking re-election this year. Just 20 (35.7%) incumbents running for re-election face primary opposition. Additionally, there are 44 (44.0%) districts where an incumbent is not seeking re-election within that district. For November’s general elections, there will be 92 (92.0%) seats where more than one major party candidate will appear on the ballot.

38.0% of Districts were open seats, increasing to 44.0% in 2012.Comparison to 2010:
In 2010, California ranked 11th in overall competitiveness.

• 9.7% of incumbents faced primary opposition, increasing to 35.7% in 2012.
• 92.0% of Districts had more than one major party candidate in the general election, compared to 92.0% in 2012.
• California’s 2010 competitiveness index was 46.6, compared to 57.2 in 2012.

Edited by Al Ortiz

The Tuesday Count took on a wild change recently with plenty of states across the nation showing political activity. California has added more fuel to the rampant fire of ballot measure developments by pulling a certified measure off of the ballot this past week.

In addition, two other states added a total of seven initiatives between them. All in all, the 2012 ballot measure total has sprung up to 143 ballot measures in 35 states.

Beginning with this week’s de-certification, California residents have to wait a while longer in order to decide whether or not to overhaul the state’s water system. Awater bond measure was removed from the ballot on July 5 when the California State Legislature approved a bill to take the measure off the 2012 ballot. Lois Wolk, one of the state senators who voted in favor of this move, said that it was undertaken because the Democratic majority in the state legislature wants to do everything they can to ensure that the “Jerry Brown Take Hike Initiative” on the November 6, 2012 ballot has a good chance of passing. She said, “We are faced with a tax levy in November. It would be disastrous to have [the borrowing] on the ballot.”^[1][2]

If voters approve the water bond, which could possibly be placed on the 2014 ballot, it would allow the state government to borrow $11.1 billion to overhaul the state’s water system.

To the north of California, on July 6, the state of Washington saw its petition drive deadline pass for ballot initiative efforts. When all was said and done, two initiatives filed signatures with the Washington Secretary of State‘s office. According to the secretary’s office the filed initiatives will be placed on the November 6 ballot. Both submitted the required number of signatures.

One of the two measures included a charter school initiative to allow 40 public charter schools in the state over the next five years. The group that is in favor of the measure, and who submitted the initiative, is a coalition that includes the League of Education Voters, Stand for Children and Democrats for Education Reform.

Also submitting signatures was an initiative effort to require either two-thirds legislative approval or a vote by the people in order to raise taxes. According to the initiative, a one-third minority of Legislators in either House or the Senate could prevent the passage of any measure to raise revenue or repeal existing tax exemptions. The measure defines repealing a tax exemption as raising revenue. Currently, it only takes a simple majority to pass a tax exemption but under the proposal, a two-thirds majority of both houses would be required to repeal it.

However, the two initiatives weren’t the only ones to have made the ballot in Washington. Two legislative referrals have also been added. One measure would implement changes in the use of state bond debt, while the other would provide clear authority to state research universities to invest funds. According to the secretary of state’s office, the measures’ formal titles were SJR 8221 and SJR 8223.

On the East Coast, Massachusetts initiative organizers had until July 3 to submit signatures to election officials in the state. According to the Massachusetts Secretary of State‘s office, all three proposals’ sponsors submitted enough signatures to be placed on the November ballot. The proposals, all of which are expected to garner plenty of attention, included the medical marijuana initiative, the“Death with Dignity Act” proposal and the “Right to Repair” measure.

[edit]Signature filing deadlines

Starting on July 3 and ending on July 9, there were 9 petition drive deadlines for proposed ballot initiatives in Arizona, Arkansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon and Washington. The required amount of valid signatures was required to be submitted to the appropriate election officials on those days in order for initiatives to be placed on the ballot.

As previously mentioned, all initiatives who filed signatures in Massachusetts and Washington have made the ballot. The same cannot be said for initiatives filed in others states…yet.

Below is a summary of which initiatives filed signatures and are currently being verified:

• Arizona (July 5): “Open Government Act” Initiative, Federal Action Rejection Initiative, Sales Tax Renewal Amendment
• Arkansas (July 6): Severance Tax Increase Question, Medical Marijuana Question, Casino Amendment
• Michigan (July 9): Collective Bargaining Initiative, Renewable Energy Amendment, Tax Approval Amendment
• Nebraska (July 6): None
• Nevada (July 9) (Veto referendums): None
• Ohio: Ohio Redistricting Amendment (2012)
• Oregon: See Quick hits

[edit]Quick hits

Final signatures submitted for veto referendums in Maryland: Supporters of both the Maryland Redistricting Referendum and the Maryland Same-Sex Marriage Referendum have submitted their final signatures. According to reports, the Maryland Secretary of State has until July 20 to verify them. Supporters must have 55,736 valid names to gain ballot access. According to reports, supporters of the same-sex marriage referendum have submitted 162,241 names total and, of this, 109,313 have already been verify by the state. The Secretary of State has until August 3 to certify the ballot title for these measures.^[3][4]

Six groups filed signatures on Monday’s deadline in Michigan: Monday, July 9, marked the deadline for groups proposing constitutional amendments to turn in names to the Michigan Secretary of State. From the list of hopefuls six amendments submitted signatures. Those that filed are as follows: the Renewable Energy Amendment, International Bridge Initiative, Taxation Amendment, Home Health Care Amendment, “Protect Our Jobs” Amendment, and the Casino Gaming Amendment. The Michigan Fracking Ban Amendment did not file signatures, but supporters are aiming to place the measure on the 2014 ballot.^[5][6]

Cayman Island residents head to the polls on July 18

Residents in the Cayman Islands will have the chance to vote on whether they would like to have single-member constituencies with each elector having just one vote. The current system, a multi-member, multi-vote elector system has been the form of voting in the country for 180 years.^[7]

Supporters of the “one man, one vote” concept had attempted to place the issue on the ballot through a signature gathering process, but the government decided to place the issue as a referendum vote instead. However, proponents are still circulating petitions in order to use gathered signatures as a way to inform people about the issue and encourage them to vote on the July 18.^[7]

The Premier of the country, along with his party, the United Democratic Party, have come out against the measure and have held meetings encouraging residents to vote against the referendum. The party has stated that the current system of voting is not broken, so there is no need to fix it. When the Premier was asked why he was against a referendum which his government initiated, he stated that they placed the referendum on the ballot because the people wanted to vote on it, but that did not mean it reflected the views of the government.^[8]

In order for the vote to be valid, at least 50 percent of those residents who are registered to vote must cast a vote in favor of the measure.^[9]

The Tuesday Count Spotlight highlights notable developments from local ballot measures across the country as well as international ballot measures. 

California has one of the biggest ballot measure totals this year. How many measures are certified? Click here to find out!

BALLOT LAW UPDATE

Judge rules in California ballot numbering case: On Monday, July 9 Sacramento Superior Court Judge Michael P. Kenny ruled against Molly Munger who had filed a lawsuit in an attempt to prevent ballot priority for a measure filed by Governor Jerry Brown over one filed by her. Munger argued that though she filed her measure before the governor’s, the Secretary of State certified his first and thereby gave his measure an advantage because it will appear first on the statewide ballot. Judge Kenny ruled that the state did nothing wrong and said that to do otherwise would be an act of him telling counties exactly how they should operate their certification procedures. As a result of the ruling, the measures that will appear on the ballot have been assigned an order by the Secretary of State, with Gov. Brown’s being the first listed.^[10]

Supporters of the Minnesota Same-Sex Marriage Amendment to file lawsuit over ballot title: Upset over Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie’s new wording for how the amendment will appear on the ballot, supporters of the measure are discussing how to proceed with a lawsuit claiming Secretary Ritchie is unlawfully using his office to fight the measure. According to reports, supporters plan to file their challenge directly with Minnesota Supreme Court. For reference, Secretary Ritchie plans to change the title from “Recognition of marriage solely between one man and one woman” to “Limiting the status of marriage to opposite sex couples.”^[11]

A new update will be released in late July. Click here for past Ballot Law Update reports!

Edited by Al Ortiz

Three states chipped in one ballot measure each this week, as the Tuesday Count seems to be slowing down for the time-being.

However, that may change with the flurry of petition drive deadlines that will continue to arrive as the first week of July progresses.

Sifting through the complex ballot measure developments that occurred recently, the ballot measure total slowly grew by three to give a sum of 137 ballot measures in 34 states. California, New Hampshire and South Dakota were the culprits who added measures to the ballot, with two of those states placing measures on the ballot via the initiative process.

After three citizen initiatives were reported to be placed on the California ballot in the last Tuesday Count, state election officials still had work to do regarding a“government accountability” act. Signatures to qualify the measure for the ballot were submitted to county election officials around the state on May 7, and the those signatures were verified by the California Secretary of State on June 26.

The measure would establish a two-year state budget cycle and prohibit the California State Legislature from “creating expenditures of more than $25 million unless offsetting revenues or spending cuts are identified.” Read more provisions of the measure here.

This brings California’s ballot measure total to 14. The large proposition total on the ballot comes as no surprise, given the state’s recent ballot measure history.

Since 2008, all but one year’s ballot had measures for voters to decide on. That year was in 2011. However, in the four other years, the average ballot measure total in the Golden State came out to a little under 14 proposals.

On the other hand, very little ballot measure activity has happened in New Hampshire in recent years. The last time voters in the state had measures on the ballot was in 2006, when two measures were approved by those who cast ballots.

This year, two more measures will be decided on during the November election. The most recently-added measure was ballot-certified by the New Hampshire Legislature before session ended on July 1. The measure would ban new taxes on personal income.

Currently the state of New Hampshire charges the following personal income taxes: the gambling winnings tax that assesses a 10 percent levy on winnings of $600 or more and a 5 percent tax on dividends and interest.

In South Dakota, supporters of a veto referendum regarding a teachers’ tenure bill achieved ballot access when signatures were verified by the South Dakota Secretary of State.

The measure would block a bill that was signed into law and supported by South Dakota Governor Dennis Daugaard that would give bonuses to high performing teachers, ban tenure and recruit potential candidates for teaching jobs that are deemed important and critical. The veto referendum effort against the bill was organized by the South Dakota Education Association.

South Dakota’s ballot measure total for the November 6, 2012 ballot is seven.

[edit]Petition drive deadlines

The Fourth of July holiday is quickly approaching, so it seems fitting for direct democracy to take over the country. Supporters of statewide ballot initiatives in seven states this week face deadlines on different days.

Starting on July 3 and ending on July 6, there will be petition drive deadlines in Arizona, Arkansas, Massachusetts, Nebraska, Ohio, Oregon and Washington. The required amount of valid signatures must be turned in by supporters to the appropriate election officials on those days in order for initiatives to be placed on the ballot.

Five out of those seven states had initiatives on the ballot during the last ballot measure election in 2010. However, a different year could mean different results.

Below are signature requirements and deadlines for each state:

• Massachusetts: Supporters of Massachusetts proposals must gather signatures from about 1/2 of 1% of voters who voted in the last governor election. This amounts to about 11,000 signatures. Signatures must be submitted to the Massachusetts Secretary of State by today, July 3.

• Ohio: In Ohio, the statewide petition drive deadline for ballot initiatives seeking ballot access in 2012 is July 4, 2012. That is when supporters of initiated constitutional amendments need to turn in 385,247. For indirect initiated state statutes, the magic number is 115,574.

• Arizona: Arizona ballot initiative efforts have until July 5 to turn in the required amount of signatures for their proposals. Signature requirements for ballot initiative efforts are 259,212 signatures for initiated constitutional amendments and 172,808 for initiated state statutes.

• Arkansas: Petition drive organizers in Arkansas will need 78,133 signatures for initiated constitutional amendments and 62,507 for initiated state statutes by July 6.

• Nebraska: For initiatives filed as state statutes in the state of Nebraska, supporters are required to collect valid signatures from a minimum of seven percent of registered voters. The number is ten percent of registered voters for initiated constitutional amendments. July 6 is the deadline for those signatures to be submitted.

• Oregon: In order to place a measure on the general election ballot in Oregon, supporters must gather valid signatures equaling 8% of the votes cast for the office of governor in the state’s most recent gubernatorial election for constitutional amendments, 6% for state statutes, and 4% for veto referendums. This translates into 116,283, 87,213, and 58,142 signatures, respectively. Signatures must be turned in by July 6.

• Washington: In Washington, initiatives hoping to be granted ballot access, a minimum of 241,153 valid petition signatures are required to qualify an Initiative to the People for the 2012 statewide ballot.

Read more about circulating initiatives in these states here

[edit]Quick hits

Minnesota Secretary of State submits new ballot title: Although Governor Mark Dayton‘s veto of the Minnesota Same-Sex Marriage Amendment was not enough to keep the question from the ballot it did succeed in invalidating the title chosen by the legislature. As a result Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie was allowed to write a new title for the amendment. The title chosen to appear on the ballot by Secretary Ritchie, which was submitted on June 28, is “Limiting the status of marriage to opposite sex couples.” According to reports, republican supporters of the amendment in the legislature do not approve of the new title and are debating whether or not to file a lawsuit.^[1]

Initiative on banning gillnetting in Oregon submits signatures: On Monday, July 2, supporters of Initiative 21 reportedly submitted 45,000 names to the Oregon Secretary of State, bringing the total submitted so far to 134,000. This total is well over the 87,213 signatures required, meaning the measure has a high chance of making the ballot this November. According to supporters, the measure would ban the practice of catching fish by the gills and smothering them, a method they argue is outdated.^[2]

Wording of Massachusetts Medical Marijuana Initiative approved by state supreme court: On July 2 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Associate Justice Robert J. Cordy released his decision approving new ballot language for a proposed amendment legalizing medical marijuana. The new language rewords the “Yes” statement on the ballot to, “A yes vote would enact the proposed law eliminating state criminal and civil penalties related to the medical use of marijuana, allowing patients meeting certain conditions to obtain marijuana produced and distributed by new state-regulated centers, or, in specific hardship cases, to grow marijuana for their own use.”^[3]

Residents in Phoenix to decide on pensions next year

Changes to public pension funds and services has been a increasingly hot topic issue, with two measures in San Jose andSan Diego California both approved by residents during their local June 5 election. In Phoenix, residents will decide on March 12, 2013 whether or not they want changes made to the city pension system. The city council voted unanimously to place this issue on the March ballot, though exactly what will be changed has not been decided. Proposed changes include changing retirement eligibility as well as setting the normal retirement age at 63 with early retirement allowed at 55 if 10 years of service have already been given. A consulting team has been hired by the city to conduct a study into the pension system and formulate proposed changes which will then be presented to the council in the fall. If the proposed changes are approved by voters in March, the changes would go into effect July 2013.

The Tuesday Count Spotlight highlights notable developments from local ballot measures across the country as well as international ballot measures. 

California has one of the biggest ballot measure totals this year. How many measures are certified? Click here to find out!

BALLOT LAW UPDATE
Initiative allowing wine to be sold at grocery stores approved by Oklahoma Supreme Court: In a narrow 5-4 ruling delivered on Thursday, June 28, by the Oklahoma Supreme Court, arguments that the Oklahoma Wine Purchase Amendment violates the state and U.S. constitutions were rejected. The initiative is known as Initiative Petition No. 396 and would allow grocery stores across the state to sell wine.^[4]

Amendment reordering California ballot measures signed into law: On June 27 Governor Jerry Brown signed AB 1499 into law. The bill, similar in effect to SB 1039, would alter the appearance of ballot items so that all proposed constitutional amendments and bond measures, whether proposed by legislative referrals or by citizen initiatives, would appear near the top of statewide ballots. However, a lawsuit challenging the fairness of the bill has been filed and Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Timothy M. Frawley has ordered the California Secretary of State to refrain from numbering items on the ballot until the lawsuit is resolved.^[5][6]

A new update will be released in late July. Click here for past Ballot Law Update reports!

June 26, 2012

Newsletter Signup

Edited by Al Ortiz

The avalanche of ballot measures that we’ve seen in the past few weeks seems to have slowed down to a glacial pace. Only three measures were placed on the ballot since the last Tuesday Count report, with all coming from the west coast state of California. All three of those measures related to taxes, and all three were a trio of citizen initiatives.

When all was said and done, the 2012 ballot measure count inched up to 134 ballot measures in 34 states.

The Golden State has seen a cornucopia of ballot initiatives proposed in 2012, and out of the 13 ballot propositions that have been or will be placed on the ballot this year, 12 have been successfully proposed by state residents, including the newly-added trio of tax measures. Only one was sent to the ballot by the state legislature.

The three that made the ballot this past week are sure to create an abundance of debates leading up to November, given that all three have a prominent figure behind them.

Starting off with Initiative #11-0080, the proposed state statute is primarily financially supported by Thomas Steyer, the founder and co-senior managing partner of Farallon Capital Management. The measure would require multi-state businesses to calculate their California income tax liability based on the percentage of their sales in the state.

In addition, the proposition would repeal an existing law that gives multi-state businesses an option to choose a tax liability formula that provides favorable tax treatment for businesses with property and payroll outside California.

The measure required 504,760 valid signatures since it is an initiated state statute.

Another initiated state statute that obtained 504,760 valid signatures to make the ballot was Initiative #11-0100, proposed by Pasadena-based attorney Molly Munger. The ballot item would bump state income tax rates for most Californians, resulting in increased state revenues of about $10 billion a year.

The state income tax rise would end after 12 years, unless voters reauthorize it.

The last of the three tax-related measures that landed on the ballot was an initiated constitutional amendment, which required 807,615 valid signatures. Initiative #12-0009 would raise California’s sales tax to 7.5% from 7.25%, a 3.45% percentage increase over current law. Also, it would create three new high-income tax brackets for taxpayers with taxable incomes exceeding $250,000, $300,000, and $500,000. This increased tax would be in effect for 7 years.

Read more provisions of this proposed tax increase here. The newly-certified state question is a merger of two previously competing initiatives; the “Millionaire’s Tax” and California Governor Jerry Brown’s Tax Increase Initiative.

Citizen-initiated ballot measures dominated the headlines in another state as well. Friday, June 22, was the petition drive deadline for Montana initiative efforts, meaning petition signatures must have been filed with county clerks by the end of the business day. According to the Montana Secretary of State‘s website, all measures filed signatures, but no official word has been released about how many were filed by each effort.

Reports have stated that at least one measure does seem to have enough signatures to make the ballot. That measure, a corporate contributions initiative, would determine state policy on prohibiting corporate contributions and expenditures in Montana elections.

There were five measures circulating around the state leading up to the deadline and all but one of them were initiated constitutional amendments. This means that signature requirements were not the same for each one; proposed constitutional amendments required 48,673 valid signatures and the single initiated state statuterequired 24,337.

Updates will be given as more information is released by the Montana Secretary of State‘s office.

[edit]Quick hits

Signatures submitted for Michigan Casino Gaming Amendment: On Tuesday, June 26, Citizens for More Michigan Jobs announced that it has submitted 509,777 signatures to the Michigan Secretary of State in an attempt to qualify an amendment authorizing eight new casinos for the November ballot. To place the proposal on the ballot, 322,609 of the names turned in would need to be declared valid by the Secretary of State. Supporters have until July 9 to submit any additional signed petitions.^[1]

Petition for North Dakota Smoking Ban Initiative approved by Secretary of State: On June 22 the North Dakota Secretary of State approved circulation for a petition for a citizen-initiated state statute proposing a ban on smoking in all indoor workplaces. The measure is being sponsored by Smoke-Free North Dakota.^[2]

Poll released shows support for Massachusetts “Death with Dignity” Initiative: According to a late-May poll taken by both Western New England University and MassLive.com of 504 likely voters, 60% support the measure, 29% oppose the measure, and 11% remain undecided. The survey had a margin of error of +/-4.4 percentage points.^[3]

Liechtenstein Prince faces referendum on veto powers

On Sunday, July 1, residents in the principality of Liechtenstein will get the chance to vote on the Prince’s right to veto, or overturn, referendum results.

A pro-democracy group collected the needed signatures to put the issue to a vote, but there has been strong resistance to the proposal, with opponents saying democracy would hurt the principality and lead to financial ruin. There are only 36,000 residents in the principality and most do not want to be seen as against the ruling power, according to reports.^[4]

Opponents to the measure have noted that the Prince brings stability and without him, chaos would ensue. Though the Prince has other executive powers, he has rarely used them, say opponents. The referendum was triggered by supporters of an abortion proposal which was voted on in September 2011. The Prince had promised that if the proposal to legalize abortion in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy was approved, he would veto the results and make the vote void. In the end the abortion measure was defeated, but proponents argued that the fear of the veto caused more people to reject it even though they might have supported it initially.^[4]

Some have noted a compromise may occur if the July 1 measure is defeated, which would not allow royals to speak out on an issue until after the vote so that their opinions would not sway an election. According to reports, most would agree that the relationship between the people and royal family is a symbiosis that neither want to disrupt.^[4]

The Tuesday Count Spotlight highlights notable developments from local ballot measures across the country as well as international ballot measures. 

How many states allow the recall of state officials? Click here to find out!

BALLOT LAW UPDATE

California considering bill requiring ballot initiatives to be translated: A new bill, SB 1233, is being considered by the state Assembly Appropriations Committee. If approved, the bill would require that all ballot initiatives and petitions be issued for circulation in all languages covered by the Federal Voting Rights Act by the Attorney General. The bill is sponsored by Senator Alex Padilla.^[5]

State appeals decertification of Montana Taxpayer Dividend Measure: On Friday, June 22, the state appealed the case to theMontana Supreme Court. Attorney General Steve Bullock, representing the state in the case, argued that voters should be allowed to vote on the ballot measure before a court decides on whether it is legal or not.^[6] The measure was previously stricken from the ballot by District Judge Jeffrey Sherlock who ruled that the measure is an unconstitutional delegation of power by the Legislature to an employee.^[7]

A new update will be released on June 27. Click here for past Ballot Law Update reports!

Edited by Al Ortiz

Following the ferocious flood of ballot measure certifications from last week is a similar gush of ballot-approved statewide proposals, this time in two states. However, unlike last week, not all certifications were from state legislatures.

With these new developments, chalk up another intense increase to the Tuesday Count, with the total now 117 ballot measures in 33 states across the country.

Starting with Alabama, the whirlwind of ballot measure activity has finally come to a halt.

The Alabama Secretary of State rounded out the list of 2012 measures on the statewide ballot by recently adding four more questions to be placed before voters.

The four questions added to the ballot included a measure to allow the state to issue general obligation bonds of no more than $750 million for economic development; a proposal relating to the authority of state legislature and banking in the state; a measure to allow the state legislature to implement a business privilege tax on corporations, among other provisions; and a question relating to legislative compensation for state legislators.

In all, 11 statewide ballot measures will appear on the state ballot, and all but one is slated for November 6. The one measure that will not be on the ballot on this date is a medicaid amendment, which would authorize the transfer of $145.8 million from an oil and gas trust fund to the General Fund for the state Medicaid budget. That measure will appear on the September 18 special election ballot.

Last week, it was reported that Florida had the biggest ballot measure total of any state with 11 statewide questions. With the addition of the four Alabama measures, these two states are now tied.

Meanwhile, the state of California refuses to quiet down, despite holding its primary election on June 5. While two measures were decided that day, two more were placed on the ballot via the citizen’s initiative process soon after

On June 11, sponsors of the proposed “Three Strikes” law and the genetically engineered food information initiative were informed by the California Secretary of State‘s office that their initiative made the November 6 ballot.

The “Three Strikes” initiative would revise the three strikes law to impose life sentence only when the new felony conviction is “serious or violent”. In addition, the statute would authorize re-sentencing for offenders currently serving life sentences if their third strike conviction was not serious or violent and if the judge determines that the re-sentence does not pose unreasonable risk to public safety.

The genetically engineered food information initiative would require labeling on raw or processed food offered for sale to consumers if the food is made from plants or animals with genetic material changed in specified ways. It would also prohibit labeling or advertising such food as “natural.”

Both measures required 504,760 valid signatures for qualification purposes.

Today, June 12, is North Dakota’s Primary Election.Check here for election results for all four measures on the ballot when polls close at 8 p.m. CST.

Signature goals reached in Arizona?

Developments in Arizona could have an impact on the state’s ballot measure count, as supporters of two separate ballot measures have stated that they collected enough signatures for their initiatives to be placed on the November ballot.

Although enough signatures were allegedly collected, supporters say they will keep circulating petitions leading up to the deadline in order to ensure that their efforts have room for error.

The two measures were:

• “Open Government Act” Initiative: The measure would implement a top-two style open primary system. In a top-two open primary, candidates for a government position run on the same primary ballot regardless of party affiliation. All registered voters are then able to cast their vote for the candidate of their choice. The two candidates with the most votes are then placed on the November. Supporters are required to collect a minimum of 259,213 valid petition signatures by July 5, 2012.
• Arizona Sales Tax Renewal Initiative: The proposal would renew a 2010 voter-approved one-cent sales tax to provide funding for education for students in the state who meet certain requirements,scholarships for college students and reinvestment in vocational education and new jobs, according to reports. Petition drive organizers must collect 172,809 valid signatures from registered voters by the July 5, 2012 petition drive deadline in order to make the ballot.

Quick hits

Minnesota Supreme Court expedites Voter ID Amendment case: The Minnesota Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for a case involving theMinnesota Voter Identification Amendment for July 17. The court is speeding up the process for reaching a ruling so that the ballot can be modified if necessary before the November election.^[1]

Polls released for North Dakota measures: An early-June 2012 poll by Mason-Dixon revealed that 70% of those polled would vote against ND Measure 2, 21% would vote for it, and 9% were undecided. A total of 404 likely primary voters were polled. The margin of error was +/-5%.^[2]

Final arguments made against the Maryland In-State Tuition Referendum: Supporters of Maryland’s Dream Act made their last arguments before the Maryland Supreme Court before the court’s summer recess. It is unclear how soon the court may rule on the subject, but reportedly, both sides expect the court to uphold a lower court’s ruling and keep the measure on the ballot.^[3]

SPOTLIGHT:North Dakota residents to decide on local issues
Residents in select North Dakota areas will also have local issues to decide on today in addition to the four statewide issues on the ballot.

Residents in Griggs County will vote on a $3.1 million bond measure, which seeks to pay for renovations for the county courthouse. A similar measure was voted down last November, which was for $4.7 million. However, officials scaled down the project in the hopes that residents would approve the lower rate this time around.

The building is reportedly considered a historical landmark that needs upgrades such as handicap accessibility as well as heating and cooling system repairs. Mold and other health-related issues have also allegedly been a constant problem, which have forced departments to move out of the building. A federal grant to help restore the building was given to the county, allowing for the lower bond rate. For this measure to be approved by voters, it will need a 60% approval.

Other issues in Griggs county include an increased sales tax in Finley and an addition to the library levy by a rate of 5 mills in Mayville.^[4]

In Mountrail County, a measure to expand the county commission board from three members to five will be decided today.

The measure was placed on the ballot through a successful petition drive which collected more than the 588 valid signatures needed for approval. Proponents of the measure note that the work load of the commission has continued to increase and having two additional members would help ease the burden on the other members. On the other hand, opponents claim that a larger government is not always in the public’s best interest. If the measure is approved, the county would have to be redistricted so that there would be five and not three districts to elect commissioners from.^[5]

What state passed a measure to the ballot this week to require that candidates for governor to select their running mates for lieutenant governor? Click here to find out!

BALLOT LAW UPDATE
ND tax opponents lose case: On June 7, a lawsuit against several public officials was unanimously rejected by the North Dakota Supreme Court. The plaintiffs argued that the public officials mislead voters about Measure 2, the property tax elimination amendment. In addition, the plaintiffs argued that the officials used taxpayer dollars to advocate against the measure. North Dakota has criminal statutes prohibiting such actions. However, for this reason, the state Supreme Court held that prosecutors, rather than the plaintiffs, are responsible for enforcing the restriction.^[6]

Lawsuit filed again CA red-light cam ban: Steve Flynn, a Murrieta resident instrumental in establishing the city’s red-light camera program, has filed suit against a local ballot measure that seeks to eliminate the cameras. Flynn contends that regulating traffic is a “statewide concern” and, thus, outside the purview of the local initiative process. In 2011, a number of Washington measures were rejected on similar grounds.^[7]

A new update will be released on June 27. Click here for past Ballot Law Update reports!

SACRAMENTO, California: Polls closed at 8 p.m. PST in California on June 5, 2012, but that was just the beginning of what turned out to be an interesting primary election night.

Two statewide measures appeared on the ballot in the Golden State – Propositions 28 and 29. Both met different fates at the hands of state voters.

Proposition 28 would reduce the total number of years a politician can serve in the California State Legislature from 14 years to 12 years. It would also permit a legislator to serve these 12 years in either the California State Senate or the California State Assembly.

Proposition 29 would increase the tax on cigarettes in the state by $1.00 per pack. California’s current cigarette tax is 87 cents per pack. The additional tax revenue will be used to fund cancer research, smoking reduction programs, and tobacco law enforcement.

While Proposition 28 was approved with 61.4% of the vote with all precincts reporting, Proposition 29 remained too close to call five hours after polls closed. With 66% of precincts reporting numbers, the measure showed 50.3% of voters had voted “no”.

With all precincts reporting, however, Prop. 29 results show an initial defeat with 50.8% of voters casting “no” votes. Results are unofficial numbers from the California Secretary of State‘s website.

All precincts have reported numbers. Unofficial results from the California Secretary of State’s website are below.

Proposition 28

See also: California Proposition 28, Change in Term Limits (June 2012)

Proposition 28
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		2,319,918	61.4%
No		1,456,749	38.6%

21,993 of 21,993 precincts reporting

Proposition 29

See also: California Proposition 29, Tobacco Tax for Cancer Research Act (June 2012)

Proposition 29
Result		Votes	Percentage
No		1,958,047	50.8%
Yes		1,894,871	49.2%

21,993 of 21,993 precincts reporting

Local measures

In addition to tracking the two statewide measures on the primary ballot on June 5, Ballotpedia also tracked two hot-button local issues that were found on those cities’ ballots.

• Proposition B, on the city of San Diego’s ballot would give new city workers a 401(k) with a city match instead of a guaranteed pension. The guaranteed pension for newly-hired public-safety workers would max out at 80% of the individual’s salary. Currently, the cap is at 90%.

• Measure B in San Jose would give current city workers “the option of switching to a lower pension or staying in the current plan and paying off pension debt with annual contribution increases of 4 percent of pay, capped at 16 percent or half the debt cost.”

Both measures were approved by voters with a majority of precincts reporting.

All precincts have reported numbers. Results are unofficial according to county websites.

San Diego Proposition B

See also: San Diego Pension Reform Initiative, Proposition B (June 2012)

Proposition B
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		110,738	66.19%
No		56,559	33.81%

749 of 749 precincts reporting

San Jose Measure B

See also: San Jose Pension Reform, Measure B (June 2012)

Measure B
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		63,023	69.58%
No		27,554	30.42%

415 of 415 precincts reporting