On October 14, a 3-judge panel of the 9th circuit heard arguments in Doe v Reed, the case over whether the names and addresses of people who sign referendum petitions should be made public, or whether the Constitution protects the privacy of petition signers. The specific case arose in the R-71 battle. This year, the Washington state legislature passed a bill to provide for civil unions for same-sex couples. Because Washington state has the Referendum process, opponents of the bill filed a petition to call for a vote on the law, so that it will not go into effect unless the voters approve. The election is on November 3, 2009, and the measure is Referendum 71 on the ballot.

The panel consisted of Judges Harry Pregerson (a Carter appointee), A. Wallace Tashima (a Clinton appointee), and N. Randy Smith (a Bush, Jr. appointee). Judges Pregerson and Tashima seemed to feel there is no need for privacy for this particular petition. Judge Tashima asked, “What are the signers afraid of?” He also asked, “Can we take judicial notice of the fact that the plaintiffs represent people who are in the majority? This isn’t a persecuted minority.” The attorney for the plaintiffs said, “We don’t know yet which side is in the majority.” But one of the judges responded by saying, “You’ve won all the elections around the country so far.” Judge Tashima also said that confrontation is just part of politics.

In the meantime, also on October 14, a state court in Washington state ruled that, pending the decision from the 9th circuit, all petitions will be kept secret, not just the R-71 petitions. Judge Richard Hicks of Thurston County Superior Court made this decision, in a lawsuit filed by Tim Eyman, who has sponsored many initiatives in Washington.

According to this Los Angeles Times news story about Tom Campbell, the Republican gubernatorial candidate supports the “top-two” ballot measure that will be on the California ballot in June 2010. This news is surprising, because Campbell was against the idea when it was last on the California ballot, in November 2004. Also, Campbell has been a professor of both law and economics, and he probably knows that political scientists are almost unanimously opposed to the measure. In 2008, Professor Paul Gronke, a political scientist at Reed College, polled the 600 members of the Political Methodology list-serve, and found only one political scientist who said he was in favor of the idea.

One reason Campbell may have changed his mind about “top-two” is that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is strongly in favor of the measure. Campbell’s position in favor of “top-two” makes it likely that Schwarzenegger will support him in next year’s Republican primary. It is reported that the Governor is even thinking of appointing Campbell to be California’s next Lieutenant Governor. That position is expected to become vacant on November 3, 2009, when John Garamendi, the existing Lieutenant Governor, will probably be elected to Congress in a special election. Also, because California’s three most influential newspapers, the Los Angeles Times, the San Francisco Chronicle, and the Sacramento Bee, all support “top-two”, Campbell’s support for “top-two” will enhance his prospects of getting their endorsement.

Campbell has also changed his position on whether marijuana should be decriminalized. For decades he has advocated for decriminalization, but this year, he is opposed to the idea.

Green Party Watch reports that the Illinois Green Party has asked all its members and supporters to telephone or e-mail their state legislators, asking those legislators to sustain Governor Pat Quinn’s veto of HB 723. That is the bill that makes it more difficult for ballot-qualified parties to nominate candidates. The Illinois Green Party is the only ballot-qualified party statewide in Illinois, other than the Democratic and Repujblican Parties.