The General Assembly was well within its authority to enact measures to “root out sloppy practices and outright fraud in the complicated business of bringing initiative and referendum petitions to a vote” when lawmakers approved Act 1413 of 2013, Attorney General Dustin McDaniel claims in response to an ACLU-backed lawsuit that disputes the legality of the law.
“The record of the 2012 election is replete with examples of forged signatures, petition verifications signed by individuals other than the canvasser who collected the signatures and notarization of signatures that did not comply” with the requirements of the law, a court filing on McDaniel’s behalf states. “Alarmed at these and other reports, the General Assembly conducted hearings and enacted Act 1413 [which] makes clear that it is meant to address the careless gathering of signatures and outright fraud that have the potential to destroy the integrity of the petition process.”
McDaniel, at his request, was added Wednesday as a defendant to the lawsuit by Pulaski County Circuit Judge Mary McGowan. The law, which adds new legal requirements for the sponsors of initiative and referendum petitions, went into effect in April once it was approved by Gov. Mike Beebe.
The lawsuit, co-sponsored by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Arkansas Public Law Center, was filed three weeks ago against Secretary of State Mark Martin in his role enforcing petition laws and certifying petitions to be added to the ballot.
Act 1413’s critics maintain the law violates Amendment 7 of the state constitution, which describes the rights of Arkansas citizens to circumvent the Legislature and directly amend the constitution and pass laws by a voter-approved initiative. The amendment also allows citizens to revoke state laws through a vote known as a referendum.
To get on the ballot, a constitutional amendment initiative requires collecting signatures from voters in an amount equal to 10 percent of the turnout in the most recent gubernatorial race. To put a proposed law on the ballot requires collecting signatures equal to 8 percent of the vote in that governor’s race. A referendum petition requires signatures totalling 6 percent of the gubernatorial race turnout. In all cases, the signatures also must be collected from voters in at least 15 counties.
The complaint is that Act 1413 has increased the expense and time for gathering petition signatures and raised the bar for ensuring the validity of those signatures, making it more difficult to get them approved. Its detractors also claim the law violates guarantees of free speech, equal protection and due process.
But McDaniel argues that Act 1413 “complements” Amendment 7 by providing “processes, rules and penalties to guide sponsors, petitioners, canvassers and the state” authorities, according to a 21-pagebrief supporting McDaniel’s request to join the lawsuit, written by Assistant Attorney General Patrick Hollingsworth.
The brief states that Amendment 7 explicitly gives the Legislature the authority to regulate the initiative process. Obtaining valid signatures on petitions has been a “persistent problem” in the state since 1938. In the filing, McDaniel reports that petitioners on four “significant” initiative efforts last year had a “dismal” time collecting valid signatures, returning with validity rates from 13 percent to 56 percent.
The new law, sponsored by Sen. Keith Ingram, D-West Memphis, was part of the attorney general’s legislative package. McDaniel asked to be allowed to join the defense in his role as defender of the Arkansas Constitution under Arkansas Code 16-111-106 as required under Rule 24 of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure.
Plaintiffs are Neil Sealy, director of Arkansas Community Organizations, and Paul Spencer, founder and co-chairman of Regnant Populus, which has sought to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot restricting gifts to elected officials.
The lawsuit was originally assigned to Circuit Judge Wendell Griffen, but he withdrew from the case, reporting that he and Sealy have worked together on several “social justice initiatives” over the years and continue to do so, according to the judge’s Oct. 18 recusal order. The case was subsequently assigned to McGowan.
Arkansas, Pages 10 on 10/31/2013