Arkansas Supreme Court Keeps Initiative Off Ballot Because Sponsor Submitted Some Documents Too Early

Posted on by August 27, 2024

On August 22, the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that an initiative should not be on the statewide ballot, because the”paid canvasser training certificates” were submitted separately, on a rolling basis, instead of all being turned in when the petition was turned in.  Cowles v Thurston, cv-24-455.  See the opinion here.

The subject of the initiative relates to abortion.

Comments

Arkansas Supreme Court Keeps Initiative Off Ballot Because Sponsor Submitted Some Documents Too Early — 30 Comments

  1. NOW STANDARD ATTACKS BY ELITES TO STOP DEMOCRACY VOTES ON ISSUES
    —
    ANTI-DEMOCRACY MONARCHS/OLIGARCHS VS THE PEOPLE

  3. So now petitioner “training certificates” are being used as a barrier to ballot access.

    Soon there will be requirements for petitioner badges with contact info, EPA requirements for flyer litter control, regulation of petitioner working hours, etc. etc.

  7. “Again, dumb idea. Doesn’t work.”

    It actually works very well in New Hampshire.

  10. No. It does not work well in NH. Or in Florida, where I personally tried it. Many friends have in NH and all said signatures were made much harder to get unnecessarily with no upside as a result.

    Furthermore, AZ doesn’t just simply mean the unnecessary paper and time waste of one signature form paper shuffling instead of getting more signatures simultaneously. The idiotic idea there is that one signature forms would circulate themselves without petitioners through the mail, newspaper ads etc.

    Otherwise, how would one signature forms be a reply to your prior comment?

    The idiocy is far worse than merely wasting petitioners, signers, proponents, clerks, etc time and or money. It’s the idea that enough people or anything approaching it have sufficient interest in petitions to fill them out, correctly, and mail them in themselves without someone who has trained and paid to do so on their face asking for their signature, in the case of many people several occasions before they decide to sign and the campaign finally gets enough valid signatures.

    If AZ merely meant the paper wasting forms, that would do nothing to address what you posted at 12:56.

  12. Petitioners are a pain in the ass to hire, manage, and deal with in any and all respects. Coming up with the money to pay them isn’t fun either. Why do campaigns do it? Why do campaigns that don’t get most if their signatures this way usually fail? Because the public is generally apathetic, and even when they care about an issue, few have the follow through to track down and print off a petition and mail it where allowed.

    Or they will fill it out incorrectly, send it in after the deadline, etc .

    It might sit on their desk with every intent to mail it in.

    Newspaper and snail mail? They’ll go right in the trash or birdcage.

    All this stuff has been tried many times, and generally the mail and ads actually end up costing more than petitioners because the return rate is so extremely low.

    A few campaigns succeed with volunteer or mostly volunteer petitioners. Most do not though many try. Which incidentally does not reduce fraud. Neither do one page forms – those actually make fraud easier, not harder.

  13. https://electionlawblog.org/?p=145366

    REDO OF TRUMP INDICTMENT —
    ANOTHER ARREST ON TV PRIME TIME ???

    SCOTUS MORONS – PARTY HACK SUBVERSION OF LAW 00001-

    AN ACT/OMISSION IS LEGAL OR ILLEGAL — NOT *OFFICIAL* INSANE NONSENSE

    IMPEACH / CONVICT THE SCOTUS PARTY HACK MORONS INVOLVED

  15. MORE ONE VOTER SIGS – LOWER SAMPLE RATE

    >>> MORE CANDS / BALLOT QUESTIONS >>> LESS MONARCH/OLIGARCH CONTROL OF EVERYTHING

  19. ONE VOTER FORMS-

    I NOMINATE _____ OF _______ FOR _____ AT THE ___ ELECTION

    OR — I WANT STATE/LOCAL ISSUE 2024-1 ON THE BALLOTS AT THE ___ ELECTION

    SIG / PRINTED NAME AND ADDRESS / DATE SIGNED

    RETURN TO ___________

    ————
    NOOOO CIRCULATORS / CIRCULATOR PAPERWORK

    NOOOO EXTREMIST CAUCUSES / PRIMARIES / CONVENTIONS — SHORTER ELECTION TIME PERIOD
    —-
    DIFFICULT ONLY FOR ANTI-DEMOCRACY TYRANTS [AND THEIR STOOGE HACKS] WHO LOVE TO KEEP CANDS/ISSUES OFF DEMOCRACY BALLOTS

  24. JR-

    1 AMDT PETITIONS IN 1789-1791 WERE NOT / ARE NOT SAME AS 2024 NOM PETITIONS FOR CANDS / ISSUES ON BALLOTS —

    LANGUAGE PERVERSION BY SCOTUS MORONS SINCE 1968 WILLIAMS V RHODES .

    ROUTINE BY SCOTUS HACKS – PERVERTING SOME PAST LANGUAGE TO APPLY TO CURRENT STUFF —
    MAINLY TO GIVE SCOTUS LEGISLATIVE POWERS.

    SAME ROT RE PREZS — GIVING PREZS LEGISLATIVE POWERS — VIA SO-CALLED EXEC ORDERS AND FORN EXEC AGREEMENTS.

    CONGRESS ALMOST DEAD AND USELESS — DEAD SAME FOR STATE LEGISLATURES
    —
    PR
    APPV
    TOTSOP

  25. JR MORE — LEGIS NO FAULT ROT —-

    TAKING CLAIM OF GREATNESS IF GOOD RESULT — OF GIVING LEGIS POWERS TO EXECS/JUDICS

    BLAMING EXECS/JUDICS IF BAAAAD RESULT — ESP WARS / CRIMES / DEPRESSIONS / ETC.

  26. @AZ,

    What is the nature of 2024 candidate petitions? What is their ostensible purpose?

    You might recall that when South Australia adopted the Australian ballot, that nomination papers only required _a_ nominator and _a_ seconder. When you call for one person nomination petitions are you advocating for the South Australian system?

    Could a legislature require single person petitions? Should the courts require single person petitions (legislating from the bench)?

  27. JR Q- AZ A–

    What is the nature of 2024 candidate petitions? What is their ostensible purpose?
    TO GET CAND NAMES ON BALLOTS

    You might recall that when South Australia adopted the Australian ballot, that nomination papers only required _a_ nominator and _a_ seconder. When you call for one person nomination petitions are you advocating for the South Australian system?
    MULTI-VOTERS DOING NOMINATION

    Could a legislature require single person petitions? Should the courts require single person petitions (legislating from the bench)?

    YES / NO – SOP

    MUST PUT IN CONST TO END MACHINATIONS RE BALLOT ACCESS FOR CANDS / ISSUES — SAME AS FOR ELECTION DATES IN CONSTS

    Z-E-R-O TRUST IN LEGIS BODY HACKS – ESP CURRENT MINORITY RULE GERRYMANDER HACKS.

  28. @AZ,

    What is a multi-voter?

    Let’s assume a Michigan voter wanted Rashida Tlaib as Senator. How would they obtain the form. How would they submit the form?

  29. “Let’s assume a Michigan voter wanted Rashida Tlaib as Senator.”

    Oh GOD no!

  30. “No. It does not work well in NH. Or in Florida, where I personally tried it. Many friends have in NH and all said signatures were made much harder to get unnecessarily with no upside as a result.”

    In all the New England states, nomination and initiative petitions have to be filed with city and town clerks for certification. The big advantage of single signer petition forms is that sorting for filing is easier, and less paper is wasted because the forms are smaller, and there is no necessity to file numerous large sheets with only one or two signatures on them.

    Anyway, the whole petitioning process can be greatly reduced and simplified if state election offices accepted filing fees as an option to petition signatures.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.