7/31/2019 This Week's Stouffer Report - Creating Transparency for Ballot Initiatives

1/3

June 15, 2012

Having trouble viewing this e-mail?

Click here . Unsubscribe

Creating Transparency for BallotInitiatives

Part of our legislative agenda during the SecondRegular Session of the 96 th General Assemblyincluded a move to streamline the process forgetting initiative petitions on the ballot. The goalwas not to make it more difficult, but to ensureballots do not become cluttered with questions

that may drive folks away from the polls.

House Bill 1869 and Senate Bill 817 were thevehicles for the changes, neither of which wassuccessful during the legislative session.

The number of initiative petitions that have beenfiled has grown drastically in Missouri over thepast eight years:

In 2004, 16 were presented to thesecretary of states office; In 2006, the number grew to 41; In 2008, it was 55 petitions; In 2010, the number grew to 105; and In 2012, it is 143 and counting.

Granted, few proposals actually make it onto a

http://www.senate.mo.gov/media/12info/stouffer/Columns.htmlmailto:abaker@senate.mo.gov?subject=Unsubscribe%20Stouffer%20eNewshttp://www.house.mo.gov/billsummary.aspx?bill=hb1869&year=2012&code=Rhttp://www.senate.mo.gov/12info/BTS_Web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&BillID=2413442http://www.sos.mo.gov/http://www.senate.mo.gov/media/12info/stouffer/Multimedia.htmlhttp://www.senate.mo.gov/12info/Members/D21/bio.htmhttp://www.senate.mo.gov/12info/bts_web/sponsoredby.aspx?SessionType=R&legislatorid=406http://www.senate.mo.gov/d21WebApps/tourinfo.aspxhttp://www.senate.mo.gov/media/12info/stouffer/Releases.htmlhttp://www.senate.mo.gov/media/12info/stouffer/Columns.htmlhttp://www.senate.mo.gov/12info/members/mem21.htmhttp://www.senate.mo.gov/media/12info/stouffer/Columns.htmlmailto:abaker@senate.mo.gov?subject=Unsubscribe%20Stouffer%20eNewshttp://www.house.mo.gov/billsummary.aspx?bill=hb1869&year=2012&code=Rhttp://www.senate.mo.gov/12info/BTS_Web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&BillID=2413442http://www.sos.mo.gov/

7/31/2019 This Week's Stouffer Report - Creating Transparency for Ballot Initiatives

2/3

ballot:

In 2004, four made it to the ballot; In 2006, there were three on the ballot; In 2008, the number was also three; In 2010, voters saw three ballot questionsagain; and In 2012, none, so far.

Missouri is currently one of only a few states withan indirect initiative, which means there are nopublic hearings or any other official information offered for any initiative petitionthat could go on a future ballot. Approximatelyhalf of the states in the nation allow their

Legislatures to review, hold hearings and takeaction on proposed ballot measures before theycould go before the voters.

Part of what is driving the number of initiativepetitions up is the submission of multiple versionsof the same measure. For instance, of the 143petitions filed this year, 61 have come from threeentities addressing three topics. In addition, thenumber of lawsuits involving initiative petitionshas grown, from four in 2006 to 50 this year.Bear in mind, no initiative petition has appearedon the ballot, so far, this year.

Senate Bill 817 and House Bill 1869 would havecreated the Ballot Initiative Transparency Act, which would have:

Required signature gatherers to disclose paid versus volunteer status;

Prohibited folks convicted of forgery from

gathering signatures;Made those who knowingly sign a falsename guilty of an election offense;

Required the Joint Committee on Legislative Research to hold a public hearingwithin 30 days of certification of a ballotmeasure;

Required a public comment period after

http://www.senate.mo.gov/12info/comm/statutory/jclr.htmhttp://www.senate.mo.gov/12info/comm/statutory/jclr.htmhttp://www.senate.mo.gov/12info/comm/statutory/jclr.htmhttp://www.senate.mo.gov/12info/comm/statutory/jclr.htm

7/31/2019 This Week's Stouffer Report - Creating Transparency for Ballot Initiatives

3/3

signatures were verified;Had proposed initiatives posted on the

secretary of states website within two days of filing;

Filed a copy of the Statement of Committee

Organization with the Missouri Ethics Commission ; and

Required 1,000 sponsoring signatures to besubmitted with a proposed initiative petitionbefore the ballot summary and fiscal note wereprepared.

There is nothing wrong with folks wanting to putimportant issues on the ballot. What I believe iswrong is signature gatherers not disclosing

whether or not they are paid, in an effort to cramsomething down our throats. This makes oursystem of government weak. It also jamscourtrooms with expensive lawsuits. A littlecommon sense would go a long way to ensurewhat goes on the ballot is good for everybody inMissouri, and I am all for that.

Senator Stouffer serves the counties of Carroll,Chariton, Cooper, Howard, Lafayette, Macon, Ray,

Saline, and a part of Clay.

If you have questions or comments about this or anyother issue, please call toll free (866) 768-3987 or by

e-mail at bstouffer@senate.mo.gov .

bstouffer@senate.mo.gov | www.senate.mo.gov/stoufferState Capitol, Room 332, Jefferson City, MO 65101 | (866) 768-3987

http://www.moethics.mo.gov/http://www.moethics.mo.gov/mailto:bstouffer@senate.mo.govmailto:bstouffer@senate.mo.govhttp://www.senate.mo.gov/12info/members/mem21.htmhttp://www.moethics.mo.gov/http://www.moethics.mo.gov/mailto:bstouffer@senate.mo.govmailto:bstouffer@senate.mo.govhttp://www.senate.mo.gov/12info/members/mem21.htm