FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED MARCH 14, 2001
THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz
Bill would leave petition-passers babbling like lunatics
When margarine was first introduced, decades ago, dairy producers
verged on panic over the prospect of a supposedly healthier and less
fattening substitute for butter -- cheaper and virtually indistinguishable
from "the real thing," to most people's minds -- suddenly showing up in the
neighborhood dairy case.
The lobbyists promptly went to work, and in states where the dairy
industry held the greatest political sway -- primarily in the Midwest --
means were quickly found to make the "new alternative" considerably less
attractive.
Margarine was never banned outright. Nothing that blatant would have been
likely to withstand a court challenge.
And the most outrageous proposals -- requiring manufacturers to dye their
naturally white product an unappetizing purple or green to "make clear its
vegetable origins" -- didn't last long. But in many states the Legislatures
did indeed outlaw the sale of margarine already dyed the color of butter,
requiring housewives for many years to go through the ritual of opening a
small, enclosed packet of orange dye and stirring it into their
bought-white margarine to give it a more appetizing appearance ... all ina
blatant protection racket to minimize the new product's impact on the
dairymen's bottom line.
Such rackets go far beyond merely prosecuting people who write "butter"
on a package of margarine. They're a blatant abuse of the legislative
process for the selective benefit of an established few, all the more
scurrilous because their sponsors rarely admit what they're really up to,
instead gushing endless double-talk about "protecting and informing members
of the public who may not be careful enough to do their own research."
Take, for example, Assembly Bill 164, currently pending before the Nevada
Legislature.
Article I Section 9 of the Nevada Constitution directs that "Every
citizen may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects
being responsible for the abuse of that right; and no law shall be passed
to restrain the liberty of speech or of the press. ..."
Article 19, Section 2 of that same state Constitution informs us that
"The people reserve to themselves the power to propose, by initiative
petition, statutes and amendments to statutes and amendments to this
constitution."
In reality, however, the hoops through which earnest Nevadans must jump
to place such initiatives on the ballot are already fairly onerous -- many
such efforts fail despite substantial funding and the collection of more
than enough signatures statewide, due to an arbitrary requirement that the
same percentage of registered voters must sign a measure in 13 of the
state's 19 counties ... including the sparsey populated cow counties.
(Imagine being told Kenny Guinn got more than enough votes to win the
governorship statewide, but will not be allowed to take up the office
because he failed to carry little Esmeralda County.)
But now, it appears that even (start ital)those(end ital) restrictions
are leaving the Nevada peasantry too many opportunities to make or amend
their own laws. That is to say, a (start ital)few(end ital) such initiative
petitions actually still find their way onto the ballot, causing all kinds
of embarrassment to lawmakers who have smugly insisted for years they were
only "representing the desires of their constituents" while nefariously
blocking access to medical marijuana and the like.
So now come Assembly members Cegavske, Nolan, Bache, Beers,
Giunchigliani, Goldwater, et al., with a proposal to make the placing of
any further citizen initiatives on the Nevada ballot a virtual
impossibility.
First, AB 164 stipulates "A person who attempts to obtain the signature
of a voter on a petition for initiative or referendum ... shall disclose to
the voter whether the person is being paid to obtain signatures on the
petition before the person requests that the voter sign the petition.
Then, "before the voter signs the petition," the petition passer would be
required to "(a) Accurately describe to the voter the effect the initiative
or referendum will have upon the law of this state; and (b) Provide to the
voter: (1) A comprehensive summary of the initiative or referendum, in
writing, that has been approved by the secretary of state pursuant to this
section; (2) Written instructions describing the procedure through which
the voter may request the removal of his name from the petition, including,
without limitation, the deadline for requesting the removal of his name;
(3) A form prescribed by the secretary of state that the voter may use to
request the removal of his name from the petition; and (4) A written
summary of the requirements of this paragraph."
Let's get real. Nevada already requires that "Each referendum petition
and initiative petition shall include the full text of the measure
proposed." Any voter asked to sign a petition has every right to stop and
read the entire text, or else withhold his or her signature. But the
reality is that petition-passers are lucky to be allowed time to proclaim a
one- or two-sentence summary of what they're offering before a shopper
makes a snap decision whether to pause at the store entrance to scrawl her
signature.
Requiring petition-passers to push multiple forms into busy shoppers'
hands while droning out some lengthy summary of their proposal,
word-for-word as pre-approved by the Secretary of State -- after being
required to introduce themselves with the statement, "Hi, I'll get a buck
for every signature I gather out here tonight" -- constitutes "compelled
political speech and is unconstitutional," objects Janine Hansen,
experienced petitioner and state president of the Nevada Eagle Forum.
Ms. Hansen is correct. This legislation can have no purpose but to
virtually eliminate the constitutional safety valve provided through direct
citizen access to the ballot -- leaving petition passers droning out their
absurd mandated speeches like so many lunatics shouting at the backs of
rapidly vanishing passers-by -- all justified under the bogus contention
that some government watchdog must "protect us" from accidentally signing
something we didn't bother to read.
As the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Thomas Vs. Collins (1945): "The very
purpose of the First Amendment is to foreclose public authority from
assuming a guardianship of the public mind. ... In this field every person
must be his own watchman for truth, because the forefathers did not trust
the government to separate the true from the false for us."
AB 164 should be committed to the shredder. And its many sponsors should
be duly ashamed.
Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas
Review-Journal. Subscribe to his monthly newsletter by sending $72 to
Privacy Alert, 1475 Terminal Way, Suite E for Easy, Reno, NV 89502. His
book, "Send in the Waco Killers:" is available at 1-800-244-2224.
***
Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com
"When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved,
as a rule the majority are wrong. The minority are right." -- Eugene V.
Debs (1855-1926)
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and
thus clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series
of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -- H.L. Mencken
* * *
If you have subscribed to vinsends@ezlink.com and you wish to unsubscribe,
send a message to vinsends-request@ezlink.com, from your OLD address, including
the word "unsubscribe" (with no quotation marks) in the "Subject" line.
To subscribe, send a message to vinsends-request@ezlink.com, from your
NEW address, including the word "subscribe" (with no quotation marks)
in the "Subject" line.
All I ask of electronic subscribers is that they not RE-forward my columns
until on or after the embargo date which appears at the top of each, and
that (should they then choose to do so) they copy the columns in their
entirety, preserving the original attribution.
The Vinsends list is maintained by Alan Wendt in Colorado, who may be
reached directly at alan@ezlink.com. The web sites for the Suprynowicz
column are at http://www.infomagic.com/liberty/vinyard.htm, and
http://www.nguworld.com/vindex. The Vinyard is aintained by Michael Voth
in Flagstaff, who may be reached directly at mvoth@infomagic.com.