Prop*50

More pot legalization votes in 2012?

As California voters make up their minds on Proposition 19, which would legalize the use of marijuana by any adult and allow state and local government to tax marijuana sales, speculation is beginning to swirl over whether this issue will retain its energy enough to crop up on ballots in other states in 2012.

The legalization of marijuana tends to be viewed more favorably by Democrats and by younger voters, who in the recent past have leaned more toward Democratic candidates than Republicans (68 percent of voters aged 18-29 voted for Obama in 2008, for example). 

A late October poll conducted by SurveyUSA in Colorado found that marijuana legalization was favored by 46 percent of Coloradans and opposed by 43 percent.  Given those numbers, don't be surprised if a Proposition 19-like initiative appears on the Colorado ballot in 2012.  The goal would be -- besides legalizing marijuana, of course -- tilting voter turnout toward Democrats on the ballot.

This is a strategy that gained traction in 2004 with same-sex marriage appearing on the ballot in 13 states.  The presence of that question on the Ohio ballot that year is widely credited with influencing voter turnout in favor of Republicans and tipping the scales in the presidential race to George Bush.

Will legalizing pot be the same-sex marriage of the 2012 elections?  Clues will start to trickle in by late 2011, as initiative filing begins around the country.

Update!  A new Gallup poll released today shows that it's not just Coloradans who are taking more positive views toward legalizing pot:  support nationwide is up 10 points since 2006, with 46 percent of Americans now saying they support legalization and half saying they oppose it.  The Gallup poll supports the idea that Democrats and young people are more likely to support legalization, as are voters in the western U.S. (where most of the initiative states happen to be too).   Support is lowest in the South and among Republican, conservative voters and those age 65 and older.

This gives us all the more reason to believe that advocates will seize on this issue and hope to push their cause onto statewide ballots around the country in 2012, and that left-leaning groups will aid in that push in hopes that support for marijuana on statewide ballots might spill over and benefit their candidates.

Support for Colorado revenue-slashing measures remains low

A new poll released today by the Denver Post and 9News reveals that support for Amendments 60 and 61 and Proposition 101 -- already very weak a month ago -- has not improved.  While the percentage of those saying they'll vote "yes" has gone up since late September, a closer analysis reveals this is not in fact a sign of increasing support.  In the late September poll, the "undecided" vote for all three was more than 40 percent.  That's dropped to 20 - 24 percent, and the majority of those who've made up their minds since the earlier poll was taken have decided to vote no. 

While the "yes" vote is up by eight points for Amendments 60 & 61 and nine points for Proposition 101, the "no" vote is up by higher margins:  11 points for Amendment 60 and Proposition 101, and 14 points for Amendment 61.

	October 19 – 21			September 28-30
	Yes	No	Not Sure	Yes	No	Not Sure
Am. 60	18%	59%	23%	10%	48%	42%
Am. 61	18%	63%	20%	10%	49%	40%
Prop. 101	21%	55%	24%	12%	44%	44%

Amendment 60 cuts property taxes by half and requires the states to reimburse school districts for the lost K-12 revenue.  Amendment 61 prohibits state borrowing and restricts local government borrowing.  Proposition 101 cuts or eliminates most vehicle and telecommunications taxes and fees.

Colorado ballot finalized

Secretary of State Bernie Buescher announced yesterday that Proposition 102 has qualified for the November ballot.  Prop. 102 is an initiative that would restrict the use of pretrial release programs under certain circumstances, requiring that defendants arrested for anything other than a nonviolent misdemeanor and first-time offense can only be released on a secured bond.

This brings the total number of measures on Colorado's ballot to nine.  Six of those are initiatives; the other three were referred to the ballot by the Legislature.

Washington: Initiatives and the budget

An article in today's News Tribune takes a hard look at five initiatives and one legislative referendum on the November ballot in Washington, and the impact they could have on the state's budget if passed.

With the state already facing a $3 billion shortfall next year, four of the five initiatives would cut state revenues by hundreds of millions of dollars, possibily billions, if passed, and cut local government revenues by half a billion dollars over the next five years.  On the other hand, the fifth initiative -- Initiative 1098, a new tax on incomes above $200,000 for single filers and $400,000 for joint filers -- would bring in as much as $2.2 billion in future years if voters approve it.  A legislative proposal to conduct energy upgrades on public and school buildings could cost as much as $937 million over the next five years for debt service payments.

Washington isn't the only state facing even more precarious fiscal conditions if initiatives pass this year.  In Colorado, the combined fiscal impact of three proposed initiatives (Amendments 60 and 61 and Proposition 101) would cut over $3 billion from the state budget.  This year's budget is $6.9 billion, so that's not small change.  In Massachusetts, a proposed sales tax cut would cost the state $2.5 billion annually.

In recent election years, voters have generally been unwilling to sign off on drastic revenue-cutting measures.  That includes 2008, when voters rejected a repeal of the state income tax in Massachusetts, significant cuts in personal and corporate income tax rates in North Dakota, and an opportunity to make federal taxes fully deductible on state income taxes in Oregon. 

Conveying the complex information that enables voters put the cost of proposed initiatives in the context of the state budget and existing programs and services is an ongoing challenge in all of the initiative states.  It is information that is too nuanced for the pro and con campaigns to address in a 30-second radio or television ad.  The idea of cutting taxes is appealing to most voters, yet the reality is that tax cuts mean cuts to programs that voters may value as well.  It remains to be seen how voters will weigh the costs and benefits of state programs and services in relation to a personal tax savings in 2010.

Health care initiative qualifies in Colorado

Colorado Secretary of State Bernie Buescher announced today that Amendment 63, opting the state out of the recently passed federal health care reform law, has qualified for the ballot.  The measure is similar to the health care question approved by Missouri voters in their August 3 primary.  It prohibits the state from enforcing a requirement that a person participate in a health care plan, and ensures people's ability to pay directly for health care services. 

Opponents call the measure merely symbolic, pointing out that state law cannot overturn federal law.  Read the "Blue Book" summary and analysis of Amendment 63 here.

Amendment 63 is the fifth initiative to qualify for Colorado's November 2010 ballot.  A sixth, a criminal justice measure dealing with bail, is still in signature verification.  The General Assembly referred three measures to the ballot.

Prop. 23 funding investigated

The Fresno Bee reports that legislative leaders in California have asked U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to launch an investigation into a Missouri non-profit called the Adam Smith Foundation.  The Adam Smith Foundation gave $498,000 to the California Jobs Initiative committee, the sole committee spending in support of Proposition 23.  (See California campaign finance records filed by California Jobs Initiative here.) California Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg and Assembly Speaker John Perez allege that the Adam Smith Foundation is taking advantage of its tax status to hide who its contributors are.

The Adam Smith Foundation's filings with the Internal Revenue Service show that it raised just $5,200 in 2009 and ended the year with $109.  The California lawmakers question how the organization is capable of legally contributing nearly half a million dollars to the Prop. 23 campaign under such financial circumstances.  They allege that the foundation is merely acting as a pass-through agent for political contributions, which is illegal under federal tax laws.

CA ballot over ballot title ends in favor of initiative proponent

The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association sued over the title that the Attorney General's office wrote for Proposition 23, and last week, they won.  They thought the Attorney General wrote the title in a way that reflected bias against the measure.  Here's the title that was challenged, along with the court's rewrite:

Suspends Air Pollution Control Laws (AB 32) Requiring Major Pollutors Sources of Emissions to Report and Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions That Cause Global Warming Until Unemployment Drops Below Specified Level for Full Year.

The Howard Jarvis side argued that "major pollutors" was pejorative, and that using the plural "laws" implied that a variety of pollution control laws might be suspending, when in fact only one -- AB 32 -- was addressed by the initiative.  A superior court judge agreed and rewrote the title.

This case illustrates the fact that it can be a difficult balancing act for a partisan state official (Attorney General Jerry Brown is a Democrat) to write a neutral ballot title for a clearly partisan ballot measure.  But it's not any fairer to let initiative sponsors draft their own title, as some states do.  Is there a better way to provide voters with a fair, neutral, and concise title for initiatives?

Read an L.A. Times editorial on this case.

Criticism of the "booming business" of initiatives

Kansas City Star editorial board member Barbara Shelly wrote an August 5 commentary on the "booming business" of petitions in Missouri.  Read it here.  Her criticism is directed not just at the large amounts spent in the attempt to qualify measures for the ballot, but also at initiative proponents who sue to ask the state to ignore its own laws when their petitions fail to qualify. 

Among the 70 or so groups that filed with the state to circulate petitions this year, she singles out one in particular for its big spending:  she says Rex Sinquefield, a wealthy St. Louis businessman, spent $6.8 million to qualify Proposition A, which would prevent cities from using an earnings tax to fund their budgets.  It's worded so that it applies to just two cities in Missouri -- St. Louis and Kansas City.

In fact, a quick check of campaign finance records filed with the Missouri Ethics Commission reveals that Sinquefield has provided just over $7.8 million of the funds raised so far by "Let the Voters Decide," the committee formed to qualify Proposition A for the ballot.  Just $400 has come from another source.

ND pharmacy initiative in question

One of the two petitions submitted for signature verification in North Dakota may not make it to the ballot.  North Dakota's initiative laws require each petition to have 25 sponsors, and that those names be submitted with the petition.  The secretary of state has rejected a proposal to repeal the law requiring that pharmacists hold controlling ownership in pharmacies -- thereby preventing large retailers from opening pharmacies in the state -- because it lacked the required list of sponsors.  The sponsors have 20 days to remedy the problem, but Secretary of State Al Jaeger doesn't think this problem can be fixed.  State law requires that petitions be circulated in their entirety, and that includes the list of sponsors.  If the pharmacy petition was circulated without that list, then it's too late to fix the problem.

Federal health care reform headed to a vote in Colorado?

Proponents of the "Right to Health Care Choice" plan to drop off petitions at the Colorado secretary of state's office today.  The initiative would attempt to withdraw Colorado from the new federal health care legislation that requires each person to have health insurance.  It will likely take the secretary of state about a month to count and verify signatures.

Should the measure qualify for the ballot, Colorado will become the fifth state to vote on the issue this year.  Missouri voters will consider it in next week's primary election, and voters in Arizona, Florida and Oklahoma will see it on their November ballots.  Colorado's would be the first initiative to make the ballot on this topic though -- all four of the others were referred to the ballot by legislatures.

CORRECTION:  Florida's health care measure, Amendment 9, was blocked from the ballot last week by a Leon Circuit County judge on the grounds that its title and summary were misleading.