Initiative for Texas Information Bulletin #6

I am forwarding this March 5, 2002 bulletin is from Dane Waters
at the Initiative & Referendum Institute.
 - - - - - - - - - - -
It's only 90 seconds if you read the following summary (if you have more
time and want more info - just keep on reading).

Update Summary:

1) A new survey by the Initiative & Referendum Institute found that 80% of
Minnesota voters favor establishing the initiative and referendum process in
the North Star State.

2) In a national referendum held in Switzerland this weekend, the Swiss
voted to join the United Nations.

3) The Montana State Supreme Court upheld a term limits initiative passed by
voters in 1992.

4) The California State Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of
Proposition 21, a juvenile crime initiative, passed by voters in 2000.

5) The Washington State Senate approved two new regulations on the
initiative process - one would require a PERSONAL financial statement from
initiative backers and the other would require a fiscal analysis of
initiatives to be posted in voter pamphlets.

6) The Wyoming House voted down two bills that would have made the
initiative process easier in the state (I am so shocked).  One would have
eliminated the state's heinous distribution requirement and the other would
have created a process that would allow constitutional initiatives.  Wyoming
currently only allows voters to propose and pass statutes utilizing the
initiative process.

There you have it - the 90 second version - read on if you want more.

Hope all is well.
Dane

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1) Minnesota Update / Poll by Initiative & Referendum Institute

Poll Shows Voters Want More Control in Government
80% of Minnesota Voters Favor Establishing the Initiative and Referendum
Process

A new survey, commissioned by the Initiative & Referendum Institute and
conducted by Portrait of America, reveals that residents of the North Star
State want influence over the laws that govern them by creating a process
that allows more direct citizen participation, namely the initiative and
referendum (I&R) process.

Highlights of the Survey

80% surveyed favor Initiative and Referendum.

Over 3 out of 4 respondents thought it was important that the House and
Senate offer the citizens of Minnesota the opportunity to vote on initiative
and referendum in the November general election

Minnesotans believe initiative and referendum to be an important issue by
greater than a 3-to-1 margin.

The results are based on telephone interviews of 1,873 Minnesota adults and
was conducted on February 2-3, 2002.  The margin of sampling error is +/-
2.3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

In addition to the Institute's poll, the following update regarding I&R
activity in MN was provided by Paul Jacob of Citizens in Charge.  If you are
interested in getting more information on the MN effort, you can contact
Paul at pjlimits@concentric.net.

"In Minnesota, Rep. Erik Paulsen's bill to establish a statewide initiative
and referendum process, HF 643, has passed the House Rules Committee and is
headed to the House floor later this month.  A Senate companion bill awaits
a hearing in the Senate Rules Committee.  At a news conference last week, a
coalition was announced to press legislators for passage of the I&R
legislation.  Supporting the bill were bipartisan House sponsors, a
representative of Governor Ventura, the Taxpayers League of Minnesota, the
Independence Party and leaders of the newly formed citizens' lobby, Let
Minnesota Vote.  The Initiative & Referendum Institute released a poll at
the news event, which showed that 80 percent of Minnesotans support I&R."
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2) Swiss Vote to Join United Nations

Swiss Approve Plan To Enter the U.N.
Vote Marks Big Step for Long-Neutral Nation
Keith B. Richburg Washington Post Foreign Service
March 4, 2002

PARIS -- For centuries, small, landlocked Switzerland has fiercely guarded
its neutrality, refusing to take sides in World War II and allowing its
banks to operate with a broad guarantee of secrecy. But today, Swiss voters
took a major step toward ending their political isolation by approving a
referendum to join the United Nations. Analysts said the decision reflected
a recognition by Swiss voters that their country of 7.3 million people in
the center of Europe could no longer sit on the sidelines in an era of
global politics and linked economies.

"Isn't it wonderful? It's truly an historic day for Switzerland," said
Jean-Noel Wetterwald, chief of fundraising for the U.N. High Commissioner
for Refugees (UNHCR).

"As a Swiss, I am doubly pleased," he said, "first because I think the
interests of Switzerland will be better served by joining the U.N., and as a
U.N. civil servant, I think Switzerland can bring something to the United
Nations," such as a culture of peaceful conflict resolution.

Wetterwald and analysts said the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the United
States might have helped the campaign to join the United Nations by
shattering the Swiss sense that their country could remain outside of and
immune from world events.

The attacks took a toll here by grounding Swissair, the national carrier,
which was already suffering financial woes. The sense of vulnerability was
heightened Sept. 27, when an armed man entered the regional parliament in
Zug, killing 14 people and himself in the country's worst mass killing.

In recent years, Switzerland has also received international criticism for
the role its banks played in secretly holding the accounts of Holocaust
victims. In 1998, the banks agreed to pay $1.25 billion to Holocaust
victims' heirs who had brought suit. While searching for those accounts, the
banks revealed they had agreed to buy gold from the Nazis -- much of it
looted from conquered countries.

Swiss banks were also forced to begin opening their books to outside
inspection, as governments from Congo to Indonesia tried to find billions
spirited out of their countries by longtime dictators, starting with the
Philippines in 1986 hunting the millions taken by Ferdinand Marcos.

Switzerland did join the League of Nations, the forerunner of the United
Nations, in 1920, and it now has U.N. observer status. It has long been a
dues-paying member of some specialized U.N. agencies such as the World
Health Organization and the UNHCR, and is home to the U.N. European mission.
It also participates in U.N. sanctions -- on Iraq, for example -- and
contributes some modest logistical help for peacekeeping operations.

Its decision today to become the 190th member state of the United Nations,
with a full vote in the General Assembly, leaves the Vatican as the only
state outside the world body.

"Now, Switzerland's full entry as a full member will enable it to make its
voice heard and influence felt across the full range of the United Nations'
work," a spokesman for U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said in welcoming
the vote.

After Switzerland notifies Annan of its intention to join, the application
must be approved by nine of the 15 members of the Security Council with no
veto, and by two-thirds of the General Assembly.

Foreign Minister Joseph Deiss and other government officials, who had
strongly pushed the measure along with the business community and three of
four national parties, toasted their victory with champagne in Bern, the
Swiss capital. "If there is a winner in this election, then it is our
country," Deiss said. "The time has come for Switzerland not only to have
obligations within the U.N. system, but also a right to take decisions."

But neutrality is a long-cherished tradition in Switzerland. It has been
practiced on and off since the 13th century, and continuously since the 1815
Treaty of Vienna that ended the Napoleonic Wars and is part of the country's
constitution.

Populists and traditionalists mounted a tough campaign to convince voters
that joining the United Nations might compromise that stance.

They warned that Swiss soldiers could be dragged into unwanted peacekeeping
missions, and the country could be forced to take part in sanctions or other
actions it opposed. They also objected to the $42 million annual dues
Switzerland must now pay and said that the real decisions are made by the
Security Council, which is increasingly dominated by the United States.

Christoph Blocher, a leader of the right-wing Swiss People's Party, warned
that U.N. membership was "a bottomless pit."

Official results, however, showed that 54.6 percent of voters approved the
referendum. Twelve of 13 cantons also approved it, providing the double
majority required under the Swiss electoral system.

A similar referendum on joining the United Nations was resoundingly defeated
in 1986.

Even with today's vote, the Swiss remain outside the European Union.
Referendums to join the EU, and to form a trade pact with the union, have
both been defeated. Nor has Switzerland moved to join any military alliance,
such as NATO.
 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

3) Montana and Term Limits

HELENA, Mont. (AP)  The Montana Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld term limits
imposed on top elected officials a decade ago, saying opponents waited too
long to mount their legal challenge.

To consider the lawsuit nearly a decade after voters enacted the limits
would be unfair to those who presumed the limits to be constitutional for
years, the unanimous court said.

"There must be a point at which a claim asserting that Montana voters failed
to follow the proper procedure in enacting a constitutional initiative
simply comes too late," Justice James Nelson wrote for the court.

"We have reached that point."

The justices did not address merits of the claims by two term-limited state
senators and two of their constituents.

Democrat B. F. "Chris" Christiaens of Great Falls and Republican Mack Cole of
Hysham, and two voters in their districts argued the 1992 initiative was
improper because it affected several state offices and, therefore, contained
multiple changes to the Montana Constitution.

They said that violated the constitutional ban on multiple changes contained
in a single amendment. The justices said those filing the suit failed to
offer a plausible reason for waiting until now to challenge term limits on
such grounds.

The court scoffed at Cole's claim that the legal fight was not ripe before
now because he only recently decided he wanted to seek a third term and had
not been aware when first running for office in 1994 that term limits would
apply to him. Nelson called the argument implausible, disingenuous and
irrelevant.

Montana voters enacted term limits by a 2-to-1 margin. The U.S. Supreme
Court later struck down limits on congressional terms, but the limits on
state offices remained.
 - - - - - - - - - - - -

4) California and Juvenile Crime

Court upholds validity of juvenile crime measure
By DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer

The California Supreme Court upheld the validity of Proposition 21 on
Thursday, setting aside constitutional attacks to the juvenile crime
initiative approved by voters amid concerns the justice system was too
lenient.

The March 2000 initiative survived two constitutional attacks, one charging
the measure violated the state Constitution's ban on intertwining too many
unrelated issues in one ballot proposition.

The Constitution forbids too many topics in one initiative to avoid voter
confusion. The high court, ruling 6-1, said that the initiative dealt with
the single subject of crime - even though it amends dozens of crime statutes
dealing with gangs, the juvenile justice system and even adult sentencing.
"These provisions are germane to the initiative's common purpose of
addressing gang-related and juvenile crime," Chief Justice Ronald M. George
wrote for the majority.

The court also dismissed a challenge that Proposition 21 was
unconstitutional because it relieves judges - members of the judicial
branch - of their authority to decide whether juveniles should be tried as
adults. Youths sentenced as adults can get life terms, but those sentenced
as juveniles cannot serve past their 25th birthday for any crime.

The initiative, creating a constitutional power struggle, gives
prosecutors - part of the executive branch of government - the power to
decide in which court juveniles should be tried.

The justices resolved the case on purely legal theories. The decision was
not based on the societal impacts of increasing criminal sanctions for
juveniles - those under 18.

"We are not called upon to resolve the competing public policies implicated
by the measure," George wrote.

Data is inconclusive on the measure's effects. The initiative has not been
widely enforced because of litigation that went unfinished until Thursday's
decision.

The case the justices decided involves a group of eight San Diego-area
youths facing adult charges of committing a hate crime for allegedly beating
up Mexican farm workers at a migrant camp last summer. The case reached the
state's highest court after an appeals panel said the measure, among other
things, violated the judicial branch by transferring one of its powers to
another branch of government.

The decision clears the way for prosecutors to take such cases directly to
adult court. Prior to the measure, a judge would hold a hearing, at the
prosecution's request, and decide whether to try a youth as an adult.

Critics said incarcerating juveniles with adults, and for longer sentences,
amounts to cruel and unusual punishment, and noted that youths sent to adult
prisons generally get no chance at rehabilitation. Juvenile advocates also
said the measure was unnecessary, since youth arrests have dropped 33
percent since 1974. But two-thirds of the voting public said it was time to
toughen up on crime.

One of Proposition 21's most contentious issues was the power struggle
between judges and prosecutors. Juvenile groups argued to the court that
prosecutors would bring too many children before adult courts. Others said
such tactics were necessary to combat a judiciary unwilling to get tough on
crime. Justice Joyce L. Kennard, in a lone dissent, wrote that prosecutors
should not have the ultimate say on where a juvenile should be tried. She
said such prosecutorial power "is unrestrained by legislative standards and
susceptible to arbitrary exercise."

Commonweal, a juvenile advocacy group in Marin County, estimates that, under
the measure, the numbers of youths in adult court would increase 20 percent.
That's because judges historically decline about 20 percent of the 2,000
yearly requests by prosecutors to try youths as adults.

The California District Attorneys Association said prosecutors would try
about the same number of youths in adult courts as they did before. They
said prosecutors would continue considering the gravity of the offense, the
juvenile's criminal history and amenability to rehabilitation before opting
against juvenile court. It is not the first time the justices have ruled on
the constitutional challenges presented in the Proposition 21 debate.

In 1996, the state Supreme Court gave judges back the power they lost under
the 1994 "three strikes" law. The unanimous court found that judges who
consider a life term too harsh can impose a lesser term than the standard 25
years to life for a three-time felon.

Regarding "single-subject" challenges, the court has removed three
initiatives from ballots. The last time was in 2000, when it said voters
should not vote on Proposition 24. The court said it violated the
single-subject rule because it reduced lawmakers' pay and granted
legislative reapportionment power to the high court.

The case decided Thursday is Manduley v. San Diego County Superior Court,
S095992.
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

5) Washington State

Senate OKs disclosure on initiatives
Backers would have to reveal expenditures

BRAD SHANNON, THE OLYMPIAN

OLYMPIA -- The state Senate approved two new controls on voter initiatives,
including a requirement that sponsors such as Tim Eyman file reports with
state campaign finance watchdogs.

The measures, which still would need House approval to become law, appeared
to pick up steam after Eyman's recent troubles in which he admitted
diverting campaign cash for his personal use and lying about it repeatedly.

"I cannot imagine a better time than this ... to let the public know what
our interests are," said Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, prime sponsor of the
campaign disclosure measure, Senate Bill 6637.

Initiative sponsors currently don't have to tell anything about where their
money comes from -- even when the measures have billion-dollar effects,
Kline said.

The other piece of legislation, SB 6671, would require that voter pamphlets
carry an analysis by the Office of Financial Management of the fiscal
impacts of any ballot measure, including initiatives.

Opponents, mainly Republicans joined by Democratic Sen. Tim Sheldon of
Potlatch, argued that both measures infringe on the people's right to make
their own laws.

"I think we should really just take a deep breath here," said Sen. Bill
Finkbeiner, a Kirkland Republican. He urged his colleagues to address the
issues down the road, not just when Eyman is in the news.

Eyman's Initiative 695 carved away nearly $800 million a year in car tax
revenue from state coffers in 1999, and his other initiatives are having
lesser effects.

"I think these initiatives were set up to be separate from the legislative
process, this legislative process and the judicial process," Finkbeiner
added.

Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, called initiatives "the people's process" and
suggested they needed to be protected.

"I think this is an attack on this little book, the Constitution," argued
Sheldon, who held up a red-covered book for the chamber to see. "I think we
need a firewall between the legislative side and the initiative side."

However, the rise of initiatives -- including two by education advocates in
2000 that added hundreds of millions of dollars of obligations onto
legislative budget writers' plates -- has caused a searching new look at
populism in the halls of the Legislature.

Other proposals in the works in the House or Senate could include letting
lawmakers convene hearings on initiatives, which they currently don't do.

Sen. Jim Hargrove, D-Hoquiam, scoffed at claims by Finkbeiner and others
that a government analysis of an initiative might intimidate the public.

"I take everything from government with a grain of salt," he said. "I don't
think they'll take something from OFM hook, line and sinker."

Brad Shannon, political editor for The Olympian, can be reached at
360-753-1688 and at shannonbrad@hotmail.com.

Senate action

Senate Bill 6637, requiring personal financial-statement disclosures by
initiative backers, passed on a 27-20 vote with two senators excused. It
goes to the House.

SB 6571, requiring fiscal analyses of initiatives to be posted in the voters
pamphlet, passed on a 30-18 vote. It also goes to the House.

Sen. Karen Fraser, D-Thurston County, and Sen. Dan Swecker, R-Rochester,
voted for both measures. Sen. Tim Sheldon, D-Potlatch, voted against both.
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

6) Wyoming

House kills measures making initiative process easier
By ROBERT W. BLACK
Associated Press Writer

CHEYENNE, Wyo. (AP) - The House defeated two proposals Monday that would
have made it easier for the public to change Wyoming laws through
initiatives and referendums.

House Joint Resolution 1 would have relaxed restrictions for placing an
initiative before voters. House Joint Resolution 2 would have allowed the
public to directly change the state constitution through initiatives.

Both resolutions failed introductory votes on the first day of the
Legislature's five-week special session.

The special session will function mainly like a budget session, with most
bills needing a two-thirds majority to be introduced.

HJR1 would have eliminated the requirement that sponsors of an initiative or
referendum gather signatures from at least two-thirds of the state's 23
counties. It needed 40 votes to be introduced but gained only 17.

HJR2 would have allowed the initiative process to amend the Wyoming
Constitution, a power now reserved to the Legislature.

Rep. Bruce Burns, R-Sheridan, urged against introduction of the second
resolution, saying it would prevent lawmakers from reviewing possible
consequences of proposed amendments.

"This would open the door to allow parties to come in and essentially buy an
amendment," he said, referring to the idea of well-heeled interests being
able to pay petition gatherers to solicit signatures for their causes.

"Now it goes through quite a process," he said.

Rep. Jack Landon, R-Sheridan, agreed.

"This nation was based on a representative democracy, not a popular
democracy," he said.
The measure failed 54-5.

The House also shot down a measure that would have required people convicted
of poaching to make restitution to the Game and Fish Department and not the
state's general fund. The bill gained only 21 votes of 40 needed.

Among the bills that received the necessary two-thirds vote for introduction
was one changing the election code to address problems litigated during the
2000 election.

One proposed change would prohibit any candidate who loses in a primary from
being allowed to run in the following general election. The other would
require changes in campaign filing forms to require candidates swear they
listed a correct address.

Other measures advanced Monday would create a state seed certification
laboratory in the Big Horn Basin; offer a free fishing day for all instate
and out-of-state residents; clarify where off-road vehicles are permitted;
authorize several water project studies; and amend the law requiring chains
on vehicles during inclement weather.