People paid to gather signatures in pursuit of citizen-initiated laws are targeted in two pieces of legislation that seek to cast private and special interest money out of the process.
Rep. James Campbell Sr., R-West Newfield, who sponsors the two bills, told the Legislature’s Legal and Veterans’ Affairs Committee Monday that paid signature gatherers have no rightful place in the process of collecting support for citizen initiatives.
“Big businesses are spending $200,000-$300,000 to gather those signatures, but the people signing aren’t told that the person asking for their signature is being paid to get it,” said Campbell.
That’s why Campbell is sponsoring one bill that would require signature gatherers to disclose that they are being paid and another bill that would outlaw paid signature gatherers altogether.
“Collecting signatures is supposed to be a grassroots thing,” said Campbell during an interview. “If you don’t have money like big business, you’ve got to gather volunteers and go and get them. When we pass laws and big business is more powerful than the Legislature that they can pay for something and overturn it for their liking, that’s why I put that bill in.”
The citizen initiative process has flourished in Maine, resulting in several questions appearing on statewide ballots in recent years. Likely headed for this November’s ballot – unless the Legislature enacts them beforehand – are four petition-initiated questions that would reverse or alter laws already on the books. They include a repeal of the school administration consolidation law, two changes to the tax code and an act in support of medical marijuana.
Opponents disagreed with Campbell’s push for full disclosure by signature gatherers and advocated leaving the process as it is.
“We already have a good court-approved law,” said Dan Billings, an attorney representing MaineLeads, which is behind the two tax code change proposals. “There is no reason for this additional requirement.”
One of the paid signature gatherers, an Augusta man who goes by the single name Jarody, said requiring this disclosure would make a difficult job even harder.
“You have three, maybe five seconds to catch someone’s ear,” he told the committee. “Tacking on ‘I’m being paid for this’ is overburdening the collector.”
Alysia Melnick, public policy counsel for the Maine Civil Liberties Union, urged the committee to reject both of Campbell’s bills.
“Direct initiatives and people’s vetoes are crucial components of our political system,” she said. “Whether an individual is paid or not does not change the nature of political expression, in the same way that an artist’s commission for a painting leaves unchanged their right to artistic expression.”
Rep. Stacey Fitts, R-Pittsfield, a member of the Legal and Veterans’ Affairs Committee, said he senses growing public anger about corporate money influencing Maine lawmaking.
“We’re going to continue to see bills just like this one,” he said. “People are just plain frustrated by this idea (of paid signature gatherers).”
Billings questioned Fitts’ assertion.
“I really wonder whether people outside this building are frustrated,” he said. “I don’t think there is any widespread concern about this in the public.”
Both bills are scheduled for further consideration by the committee on April 3.
(Statehouse News Service)
