Both houses of the California legislature have passed bills making it illegal for anyone to pay petitioners on a per-signature basis. The Assembly passed AB 1947 on April 30, and the Senate passed SB 1394 on May 31. The two bills are similar, but not identical.
Gerrymander TYRANT oligarchs at Work —
esp to STOP voter issue petitions in CA — Const Amdts and laws
besides STOP having opposition in top 2 primaries.
Will the TYRANT hacks get Stalin/Hitler TYRANT medals — from each other ???
—
PR and AppV
Pluralist only want to report about plurality elections but the United Coalition only reports about our team which prohibits all single winner district elections.
When pluralists report and nurture plurality elections, they are perpetuating plurality elections.
The Unity Coalition has the juice.
The juice is the 100% unity of our team collaborating under pure proportional representation (PPR).
The United Coalition has been using PPR for twenty-three consecutive years and PPR works very well.
http://www.international-parliament.org/ucc.html
Let’s look in the mirror and make our team better. The pluralist message of crying over pluralists is their message but our team’s message is to look at how us proportionalists can perpetuate the repetition and to practice the methods which build on team unity.
Perfect practice makes perfect.
By prohibiting single winner districts and plurality voting our team has thankfully demonstrated unity as the correct message.
This law is of dubious Constitutionality, and almost certainly aimed at people who forego the (often exorbitant) filing fees in favor of gathering signatures, ie third party and Independent candidates. Yet people somehow still believe that the Democrats actually care about democratic elections more than the Republicans. Bah! I hope all the third/minor parties band together and bring this to court.
Does either of these laws apply if the signatures are obtained outside the United States, viz., overseas?
Mark, Federal Election Commission (FEC) Laws are not regulating payments made from the USA to overseas.
The FEC is instead only concerned with foreign money coming to USA Federal elections.
@Joshua,
The law only applies to initiatives, referendums, and recall petitions (the sponsor of the soon to be former Senator Josh Newman, who the Democrats tried to protect with the Crooked Old Man Brown Slow Walk Recall).
In California, relatively few signatures are required. I doubt that it would be cost effective to hire someone to collect in lieu of signatures for a candidacy.
If I were to pay a petitioning company $X million to collect 400,000 signatures have I violated the proposed law?
What about if I agree to pay someone $25/hour and tell them I think they are a responsible individual and they don’t have to punch a time clock so long as they produce 300 signatures per week?
If they think they can gather more signatures, they may make a counter offer of $35/hour; or perhaps take a second job gathering signatures for another effort.
Any payment is at least indirectly based on productivity.
Will the gerrymander HACKS pass a law requiring a minimum wage of a mere Million/Billion dollars an hour to collect sigs ???
Gee – are the gerrymander OLIGARCHS the ENEMIES OF DEMOCRACY AND THE PEOPLE — AND HAVE BEEN SINCE 4 July 1776 ??? Duh.
—
PR and AppV
If this passes, it will make ballot access more difficult in California, and this is not a good thing.