Voter Initiatives Restricted

Timmahh

Timmahh

Well-Known Member
To be clear, SB 776 is a moot point to the petitioning process.

Statistically speaking 180 days is about the middle of the pack where Initiative processes are concerned across the uS. A portion of states have NO process at all. Out of the ones that do, the collection periods for Initiative (Statutory or Constitutional) range from 120 days, to 160 days up to 4 yrs. A number of states have 4 yrs to collect the required signatures. Florida is one of them.

Now, when compared to each other, those states with the shorter collection period allowed, actually put more initiatives on their state ballots to be voted upon. So following the Statistical curve the shorter the collection period, (120 days being the shorted for a Initiative, while most all that have the option to referendum are set at 90 Days, and one or two are 60 days) the larger number of Initiative that are put on the ballots.

Michigan has put quite a number of initiated changes upon the ballots by People Initiative process in the last 62 years. All have had to clear the 180 day hurdle.

So why has this mountain been made out of what is actually a mole hill?

To keep you distracted from actually doing something and changing things.
 
Dr.Pecker

Dr.Pecker

Well-Known Member
Timmahh said:
Disclaimer, Passthelid, this reply is NOT Directed at you, Just used your comment.




MiLegalize were so off base with this nonsense, it is not even funny here. That part eluded too in the quote simply indicates the criteria to be followed in determining the number of qualified signatures needed for the initiative process to qualify for the Ballot.

The total number of votes cast for governor at the last election is where the 5% for referendum; 8% for Statutory Initiative; and 10% for Constitutional Amendment numbers are calculate from, thereby indicating how many signatures are required for the Initiative being circulated to 'make the ballot'.

SB776 did not change the Petitioning Process at all. There has been 180 days signature gathering time since 1954 and the passage of Public Act 116. That is over 62 yrs. Ever petition to ever be put on the ballot by We the People via the Petition Signature gathering process has had to clear the 180 day hurdle, including the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. This whole SB 776 has been a red herring as it has not changed anything with regards to the Petitioning/Signature Gathering Process.

The Michigan Constitution clearly indicates Legislature has the Authority to write Michigan Election Law In 1954, Public Act 116 was passed, which outlined the Petitioning Process in Michigan, at which time the 180 days was put in place. This has been Constitutional Law since it was made Law here in Michigan. That has not changed, and SB 776 did not change it. All Sb 776 did, was make clear, A petition campaign for a Indirect Statutory Initiative and a Constitutional Amendment has 180 days to collect the required number of valid electoral signatures to qualify from the ballot. That 180 day time frame is determined by the day a campaign submits their signatures to the state for validation. The day they are submitted is used, and the immediately prior 180 days is the "prescribed 180 day signature collection time".

That is what the MMM Act had to clear, and it needed to have more signatures than MiLegalize required.

The reason MiLegalize Failed is because 1st and foremost, the Initiative Language was Terrible. It was just as bad as what was just signed into law by Snyder. MiLegalize can be called the Recreational Pot version of what Lansing just gave us.

For anyone that has been bitching about needing Lansing to fix it for them with Tax and Regulate, well pat yourselves on your back. You got it, so take your bows.

Then get the fuck out of the way and let us fix your fuckups.
Click to expand...
Were we close?
 
TheMan13

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
I cannot think of a ballot initiative in my lifetime in this state that a 180 day signature window was not realized. Am I wrong? MMMA surely did ...

All those NORML attorneys behind MILegalize yet that basic legal technicality goes unheeded? I've lost a lot of respect for that group this year given this glaring legal/leadership failure, as these brain trusts simply should have know better. As for not admitting the obvious mistake and taking responsibility, but rather attempting to create a political straw man and exploiting the ignorance of our community in attempt to cover their own asses ...
 
phaquetoo

phaquetoo

Well-Known Member
NurseNancy420 said:
Numbers to prove that opinion?
Click to expand...
I beleive timmah put the numbers out!

I cant find the numbers, so my bad! I do beleive they had the numbers but they say some were to old! Im wondering if timmah can set us straight on why they lost!

Im just bummed none of them made it on the ballot, I would love a law like mass, 10 oz's and 12 plants, that is a pretty darn good rec law!

Peace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top