23 October 2006
Law Matters -- Understanding Ballot Issues: Fair and Accurate Explanations
The following reflections of Missouri Chief Justice Michael A. Wolff make up his October 2006 Law Matters column.
The November 7 election ballot has four proposals to change the Missouri constitution – which only voters may do. As in years past, some proposals are the subject of heated debate. Other proposals, whose merits may be self-evident, draw little attention.
Whether hotly contested or not, voters often want to know what a proposition really means beyond the ballot question presented in the voting booth. The ballot question the voter sees in the voting booth is limited, by law, to 50 words when the proposal is made by the general assembly, and limited to 100 words for proposals that are put on the ballot by voters who sign initiative petitions.
So, if the 50- or 100- word questions, called ballot titles, are not enough, the full text of the ballot proposition is published once a week in newspapers throughout the state prior to the election. Most voters, however, do not go through the tedious process of reading the entire text of a proposition, which often is written in legalese and in fine print.
To remedy this situation, the general assembly in 2003 enacted a law to give voters "fair ballot language" as to what a proposition means. The law requires that the secretary of state produce "fair ballot language statements that fairly and accurately explain what a vote for and what a vote against the measure represent." This language then is submitted to the attorney general to approve the legal content and form of the proposed statements.
Secretaries of state of both parties have, under this law, produced short summaries of ballot propositions that are fair and accurate and that give voters a concise summary of the measures on which they are voting.
Take, for instance, one of the lesser-known ballot questions, Amendment 7, which relates to the conduct and compensation of statewide-elected officials, legislators and judges.
What the voter sees in the voting booth is the following question, called the "ballot title:"
"Shall Article XIII, Section 3 of the Constitution be amended to require that legislators, statewide elected officials, and judges forfeit state pensions upon felony conviction, removal from office following impeachment or for misconduct, and to require that compensation for such persons be set by a citizens' commission subject to voter referendum?
"It is estimated this proposal will have no costs to state or local governments."
The law requires the "fair ballot language" to tell the voter what a "yes" vote means and what a "no" vote means. As to Amendment 7, the fair ballot language says:
"A 'yes' vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to disqualify any statewide elected official, member of the General Assembly or state judge from receiving any pension from the state of Missouri if such official is convicted of a felony which occurred while in office. These officials will also be disqualified from receiving a pension if they are removed from office for misconduct or after impeachment. These restrictions shall apply after January 1, 2007.
"This Proposition further changes provisions relating to the Missouri Citizens' Commission on Compensation for Elected Officials. The Constitution currently provides that every two years, a citizens commission determines the compensation for statewide elected officials, members of the General Assembly, and state judges based on their duties. The purpose of this commission is to ensure that the power to control the rate of compensation of elected officials is retained and exercised by Missouri taxpayers. This Proposition will prevent the General Assembly from changing the commission's recommended compensation schedule for elected officials through the appropriation process. Instead, the General Assembly will only be allowed to disapprove the commission's recommendations by a two-thirds majority vote. Members of the General Assembly cannot receive any compensation increase approved by the Citizens' Commission until January 1, 2009."
What does a "no" vote mean? According to the fair ballot language:
"A 'no' vote would allow payment of a pension from the state of Missouri to any statewide elected official, legislator or state judge who is convicted of a felony occurring while they were in office or who were removed from office for misconduct or following impeachment. The compensation schedule of statewide elected officials, legislators and state judges determined every two years by the Citizens' Commission would continue to be subject to change by the General Assembly through the appropriation process."
The fair ballot language also reaffirms: "This measure will have no impact on taxes."
What's the difference between the pension forfeiture under Amendment 7 and the pension provisions of current law? Current law, for instance, only applies to felonies committed in connection with a legislator's duties. The ban in Amendment 7 applies to all felonies committed while in office, not just those related to official duties. Amendment 7 also would forfeit pension rights for those removed from office for misconduct – a provision not in current law. And, as part of the constitution, which is superior to statutory law, the provisions are permanent and cannot be changed by legislation – only by a vote of the people on a constitutional amendment.
For any of the four Constitutional amendments on the ballot, and the one proposition for statutory change that is on the ballot, if the voter believes that campaign materials, editorials, letters to the editor, or other information that has been distributed or broadcast about the ballot language are confusing, the fair ballot language, by law, is the authoritative source for concise and precise information about the proposition. The law only provides for posting these "fair ballot language" statements at each polling place. They are also on the secretary of state's Web site, www.sos.mo.gov.
These "fair ballot language" statements are not intended to persuade voters to vote for or against a particular proposal – that is what campaigns try to do on controversial issues – but simply are intended to help voters to understand better the proposals on which they are voting.
What does a "no" vote mean? According to the fair ballot language:
"A 'no' vote would allow payment of a pension from the state of Missouri to any statewide elected official, legislator or state judge who is convicted of a felony occurring while they were in office or who were removed from office for misconduct or following impeachment. The compensation schedule of statewide elected officials, legislators and state judges determined every two years by the Citizens' Commission would continue to be subject to change by the General Assembly through the appropriation process."
The fair ballot language also reaffirms: "This measure will have no impact on taxes."
What's the difference between the pension forfeiture under Amendment 7 and the pension provisions of current law? Current law, for instance, only applies to felonies committed in connection with a legislator's duties. The ban in Amendment 7 applies to all felonies committed while in office, not just those related to official duties. Amendment 7 also would forfeit pension rights for those removed from office for misconduct – a provision not in current law. And, as part of the constitution, which is superior to statutory law, the provisions are permanent and cannot be changed by legislation – only by a vote of the people on a constitutional amendment.
For any of the four Constitutional amendments on the ballot, and the one proposition for statutory change that is on the ballot, if the voter believes that campaign materials, editorials, letters to the editor, or other information that has been distributed or broadcast about the ballot language are confusing, the fair ballot language, by law, is the authoritative source for concise and precise information about the proposition. The law only provides for posting these "fair ballot language" statements at each polling place. They are also on the secretary of state's Web site, www.sos.mo.gov.
These "fair ballot language" statements are not intended to persuade voters to vote for or against a particular proposal – that is what campaigns try to do on controversial issues – but simply are intended to help voters to understand better the proposals on which they are voting.
###