[EL] Michigan Secretary of State seeks to block ballot initiatives by special interests

[Lowenstein, Daniel]

         The fact that all the initiative proposals in question in Michigan were defeated is consistent with what I reported three decades ago based on research in California, that a large spending advantage is of little help in trying to pass an initiative, though it is quite potent in trying to defeat one.

          I continue to believe, as Bob Stern and I argued in a law review article, that Meyer v. Grant, which struck down a prohibition on paid initiative circulators, was wrongly decided.  In my view, it is no infringement whatever on freedom of speech for the state to provide ballot opportunities only for proposals that better demonstrate a level of popular support than is possible when paid circulators are used.  However, there is a good likelihood that the Court would uphold the method I think is best for qualifying initiatives, to do away entirely with circulators and to have initiatives available for signature only in public or quasi-public places such as firehouses, libraries, or post offices.

             Best,

             Daniel H. Lowenstein
             Director, Center for the Liberal Arts and Free Institutions (CLAFI)
             UCLA Law School
             405 Hilgard
             Los Angeles, California 90095-1476
             310-825-5148


________________________________
From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Sam Bagenstos [sbagen at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 5:23 AM
To: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: [EL] Michigan Secretary of State seeks to block ballot initiatives by special interests


What do Bopp, Smith, et al., make of this story?


Michigan Secretary of State seeks to block ballot initiatives by special interests
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012311300082

(Sent from Free Press)


Sent from my iPad