[EL] Secret signatures and secret ballots

[Doug Hess]

One other thought: Is there any recent evidence of substantial intimidation
to get people to sign or not sign? Arguments about solutions for policy
problems that don't include some empirical investigation means we don't know
if there is a problem nor the true nature, scale, and consequences of the
problem. After all, Dan's solution (have petitions at government controlled
locations) might be a solution worse than the problem.

-Doug

 From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [
law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene [
VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 3:16 PM
To: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Secret signatures and secret ballots

       I appreciate Dan's point, and if indeed the main reason for the
secret ballot is preventing voters from being bribed to vote in favor of an
initiative, then I agree that there's a difference between secrecy of the
ballot and secrecy of initiative/referendum/recall signatures.

       But it seems to me that at least a very large part -- perhaps the
largest part -- of the modern support for the secret ballot is that it lets
people vote their conscience without fear of retaliation (not just from
signature gatherers but also from others, including initiative opponents).
This is both seen as fairer to voters, and more likely to reflect actual
public sentiment, unaffected by the fear of retaliation.  In this respect,
the worry isn't just that people will be intimidated into signing a petition
(I agree that this risk remains present regardless of whether either ballots
or initiative signatures are kept secret).  The worry is that people will be
intimidated into not signing a petition, and not voting for the initiative.

       And this concern, it seems to me, counsels equally for secrecy of
signatures as it does for secrecy of ballots.  Again, perhaps the recall
example might be especially helpful:  We have a secret ballot as to
candidates partly because we don't want incumbents to intimidate people into
voting for them.  (We also don't want challengers to do the same.)
Likewise, we have a secret ballot on the recall for precisely this reason.
Wouldn't having secrecy of signatures as to the recall petitions likewise
serve the same goal, to pretty much the same extent?  True, such secrecy
wouldn't prevent intimidation of voters into *signing* the petition; but it
would minimize the intimidation of voters into *not signing* the petition.
And if that's so as to recalls, it seems to me it's comparably so as to
initiatives and referenda.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111021/b4c5bde7/attachment.html>