Fraud taints antigay measure

[kweerwolf]

ON TUESDAY, the secretary of the Commonwealth certified signatures for a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage that will begin a process to place the question on the 2008 ballot. He did this despite significant documentation of fraud in the signature-gathering process.

Within days after the signature-gathering began for this ballot measure, allegations surfaced throughout the state that signature collectors were using bait-and-switch tactics to deceive people into signing the petitions. MassEquality, a coalition defending equal marriage rights for same-sex couples in Massachusetts, fielded numerous complaints of signature collectors who asked people to sign a petition to allow the sale of beer and wine in grocery stores, and instead collected the actual signatures on the antigay marriage form.

In the ballot initiative process, the secretary of the Commonwealth has the responsibility of certifying the validity of those signatures presented to him to ensure legitimate support for the proposed question. The secretary should not merely rubberstamp the signatures presented and pass this issue on to the Legislature, where the amendment only needs 25 percent approval of a constitutional convention in two successive legislation sessions in order to appear on the 2008 ballot.

Rather, the secretary should fight to protect the integrity of the process. The antigay marriage ballot measure should not move forward in the face of these serious allegations of fraud. It is the secretary's responsibility to conduct an investigation that should include a check on a random sampling of the names presented. Individuals should be contacted to determine whether their signatures were valid. If the results of that investigation confirm that signature collectors committed fraud, the measure should not be allowed to proceed to the ballot.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/12/22/fraud_taints_antigay_measure/

[TechBear_Seattle]

1. These tactics have prompted the Washington Sec of State to act

On the SoS "legislative agenda" for 2006 -- a published list of bills the Secretary of State's office is submitting to the State Legislature when it convenes next month for its 2006 session -- is a proposed bill to make it a gross misdemeanor to circulate a petition that appears to support a measure that differs from the actual measure attached to the petition. Under state law (RCW 9A.20.021), a gross misdemeanor is punishable by up to a year in prison and/or a fine of up to $5,000. Based on judicial precedent, each signature thus obtained would probably count as a single violation; a petition with 20 signatures would thus count as 20 violations.