Michigan Votes Forum

  This guy John Gleson wants to take away the rights under our state constituting to put matters before the voters .

I say we need to start a recall on this communist son of a gun.

The citizen initiative Constitutional amendment process as laid out in this bill makes sense on three important counts.  Having the state board of canvassers approve ballot language clarity before the sponsors are permitted to gather signatures would:

1)  Ensure that valid signatures really do “count” toward getting a proposition on the ballot.  It puts the horse properly before the cart.

2)  Ensure that people asked to sign the petition have full opportunity to know exactly what they are asking to have put on the ballot.

3)  Enhance transparency of the process, so people who are asked to sign the petition have a better opportunity to know who is driving the initiative.  It also would give and the general public more opportunity to be aware of the initiative.

 The board of canvassers has to approve the language before in goes on the ballot anyway.  The real intent of this bill is to allow the foes of the constitutional amendment in question (typically something to restrain government) to be warned ahead of time so they can organize the opposition before petitioning starts.  After all, the best way to stop a ballot proposal is to keep it off the ballot in the first place.  This bill is an attempt to stifle the citizen's ability to pursue the initiative process and it should not pass. 

  Your reasons are a bunch of balloney,the only reason Gleason put this bill on the agenda is to keep the citizens from taking part in their government. Gleason is term limited out this term ,and I say good ridance.

It is my opinion this bill would improve the process for citizen initiatives seeking Constitutional amendments, and protect citizens' rights to transparency in government.

I simply do not see it as in any way impeding citizens' rights to be fully involved in shaping and directing their government. 

Bull, FreeSpeaker

changeagent:

 The board of canvassers has to approve the language before in goes on the ballot anyway.  

Absolutely correct.  This bill would put the horse properly before the cart and thereby ensure that valid petition signatures really “count” toward getting a proposition on the ballot.

The real intent of this bill is to allow the foes of the constitutional amendment in question (typically something to restrain government) to be warned ahead of time so they can organize the opposition before petitioning starts.

This works both ways.  It also provides natural supporters of the proposed amendment opportunity to be aware of what is going on so they can organize themselves, become involved as active supporters, etc.

A better informed, more fully informed voting public is positioned to make better decisions on proposed constitutional amendments.  This bill sets out a process that would help foster a better informed voting public when it comes to citizen initiated constitutional amendment proposals.

Further, passage of this bill would provide people asked to sign the petition better opportunity to know exactly what they are asking to have put on the ballot.  That should be obvious to anyone, because it ensures they would have available to them the actually approved ballot language.  

After all, the best way to stop a ballot proposal is to keep it off the ballot in the first place.

Well, isn't the signature phase of a citizen initiative a real part of the political process, too?  And shouldn't that phase be as open and above board as all other phases of the process?

This bill is an attempt to stifle the citizen's ability to pursue the initiative process and it should not pass. 

Not at all.  This bill is a classic proposal to make government more open and transparent.  

FreeSpeaker, This bill is nothing but an attempt to stop the citizens of Michigan from overriding a  bunch of nuts like Gleason.

   This guy is nothing but a lackey from Genesee County, this guy is term  limited out and that is a good thing.

  It is non of John's business in the first place if the language on the petition is correct. This nut needs to get a real job.

It is non of John's business in the first place if the language on the petition is correct.

That is entirely wrong. 

It is very much the business of Sen. Gleason and every Michigan citizen if the proposed language of a ballot proposal is clear and correct, that is, written to accurately describe the proposal and be accurately understandable to the voter.

The clarity and accuracy of proposal language will be determined by the Board of Canvassers before a proposal actually goes on the ballot in any and every case.  The most appropriate time to do this is before signatures on a citizen initiative petition are obtained.  That is exactly what this bill proposes to require, nothing more, and nothing less. 

Doing things in the order proposed by SB 413 fully ensures that valid signatures will “count” toward actually putting the proposal on the ballot to go before the state’s voters.  It also ensures that those asked to sign an initiative petition will have available to them the actual ballot language they are endorsing.

This bill is nothing but an attempt to stop the citizens of Michigan from overriding a bunch of nuts like Gleason.

That statement is wrong on two counts.

First, ad hominum attacks on Senator Gleason do not constitute an argument against this bill. 

Second, I do not know much about Senator Gleason, but the language of this bill is clear. Its passage will benefit the citizens of Michigan by making their government – and the shaping of their government by Constitutional amendment – more transparent.  Better informed voters make better decisions at the polls.

So I guess I have an advantage ,I do know this little man ,and yes he is a know nothing do nothing nut..

 And it is non of your business either what the petition language says,unless you are going to sign the thing.

This bill makes so much sense, I don't know how anyone could be against it, unless, of course, someone just doesn't like the bill's sponsor and allows common sense judgement to be clouded by personal feelings.

 This bill makes no sense at all. First  of all it is not your business how the petition  reads at the time it is being circulated .Now if you are handed the petition to sign,it is up to you now to read the thing and make up your own mind..

     This is what old John likes to do ,try and do the thinking for you. Old John has a rough time doing his own thinking. 

It sounds like you like to have people do your thinking for you.Are you trying to tell us something? Maybe the people that can not think,  need a court appointed guardian. 

This bill makes so much sense, I don't know how anyone could be against it, unless, of course, someone just doesn't like the bill's sponsor and allows common sense judgement to be clouded by personal feelings.

Thank you for making my point.

 We need a bill to protect the voters from people that want to take our rights away.

    Like all the so called freespeakers.I will repeat myself,you do not have enough to do.

They have homes for people like Gleason,this bill will never pass anyway.

And thank you for making my POINT.

warner55 posted:

 

We need a bill to protect the voters from people that want to take our rights away.

 

    Like all the so called freespeakers.I will repeat myself,you do not have enough to do.

Since reference to me has been made here, I will jump back into the discussion. 

First of all, it is true we need to protect voters – that is, we need to protect ourselves – from people who would take away our rights.  Passage of SB 413 would help protect our rights by increasing transparency in the Michigan Constitution’s amendment process.

Second, I do have plenty to do in my life other than respond to whacked out posts that say things like the following.

warner55 posted:

 

And it is non of your business either what the petition language says,unless you are going to sign the thing.

If the author of that statement had not made it clear he/she was serious by repeating it in more elaborated form, it would not be worthy of response.  But the idea expressed in that statement is so repugnant that when made seriously it must be challenged.

Petitions and initiatives to change our Michigan Constitution, the fundamental law of our State, are very much the business of every citizen.  Period.

To suggest that the wording of Constitutional amendment initiative petitions and ballot proposals is only the business of those who sign them is one of the most anti-American statements ever posted on this board. 

This nation was founded on the principle of participatory governance.  That means we are supposed to be governed not by secret cabals but by “the people” at large.  Note that the very first words of our national Constitution say,

We The People of the United States … .

In Michigan, the very first article of our State Constitution says, in its entirety,

§ 1 Political power.

Sec. 1.

 

All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their equal benefit, security and protection.

Every bill in the legislature (including this one) begins with the words,

The people of the State of Michigan Enact:

The more we know about initiative petitions, and what they say, the better will be our collective decision on whether they should be adopted.  This applies at every step of the process, from signing the initiative petition (or not) to voting for (or against) its being added to our Constitution.

It makes great sense to require that the Board of Canvassers approve ballot language for an initiative petition to amend the State Constitution before signatures are collected.

Pre-approval ensures that every valid signature that is collected really would count toward putting the proposal on the ballot.

Pre-approval for clarity and form ensures that petition signers have full opportunity to know exactly what they and fellow voters will be voting on if the petition drive is successful.

Pre-approval for clarity opens the process, so the public in general has a better opportunity to know who is sponsoring a petition, and what the petition seeks to do.  A better informed public is positioned to make better decisions at the petition signing and election day stages of the process. 

SB 413 may not pass.  But it should.  This is one of the better pieces of legislation proposed so far during this session.

Senator Switalski asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Switalski’s statement is as follows:

Thank you for the opportunity to offer this amendment which tie-bars these election bills to Senate Bill No. 888. Adoption of this amendment will save schools $10 million statewide. These times call for bold action, but these obscure election bills lack ambition. Let’s fortify them by adding in the most important election reform possible. Pass my amendment requiring that all general elections be held in November.

Why should we do this today? When we consolidated elections in 2003, many of us thought school districts would do the financially-responsible thing and voluntarily move their elections to November. We never dreamed they would pay for something they could get for free. But districts have wasted scarce dollars by stubbornly insisting on holding their own elections on a separate date. How can they complain to the Legislature about a lack of funds when they voluntarily waste resources? At last count, 80 percent of school board elections are still held in May. There are 436 school elections in May and 115 in November, and that doesn’t even count separate bond and millage proposals, which squander yet more money.

Seize this opportunity to make government efficient. Transparent government holds regular elections on a known set schedule and does away with abuses like stealth elections. Election consolidation saves money by piggybacking elections on dates a regular election is already held. At a time when we are cutting both revenue sharing to local governments and aid to schools, shouldn’t we insist that scarce dollars not be wasted by duplicative, inefficient, and redundant elections?

For example, the city of Detroit has a $250 million deficit. They just held four elections for mayor last year. In February of this year, in the dead of winter, there will be a school bond election in Chippewa Valley in Macomb County. In May, Macomb has eight school board elections. Utica Schools spent $100,000 holding an election last year they could have held for free. Chippewa Valley spent about $60,000 doing the same thing. These elections routinely draw fewer than 5 percent of eligible voters. That money would better be spent in the classroom.

If you believe in reform, support this election consolidation amendment.

I would like to see all fraudulent petition signatures made a crime punishable by a heavy fine and disbarment if the signer is an attorney. I was at a township meeting where a petition with apparent fraudulent signatures was presented. When they were challenged, the petition gatherer-an attorney-offered more signatures, but the deadline was beyond the time limit allowed to present the signatures. The attorney escaped without being prosecuted because the challenger was a neighbor.

 I would like the Republicans to post their reasons for opposing this bill. If they don't, my wife and I just might have to consider helping clean out  the Lansing next election. The only problem is, that would mean they would be spending more time in their districts.

Actually, all but one Republican senator voted to approve this bill. 

It's good to see this has cleared the Senate.  And it is especially good to see that it passed without amendments to complicate and clutter the proposal.

Point well made.