PETITION CURBS STRUCK DOWN

Jan. 13 - Unconstitutional restrictions have improperly stymied Colorado's
citizen initiative process, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.

The restrictions strike at the heart of free political speech and
disenfranchise many people from participating in the political process,
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote.

The court struck down state requirements that petition circulators be
registered voters and wear name badges, and that monthly reports be filed by
ballot proponents naming paid circulators and the amounts paid to them.

Ginsburg said the First Amendment requires the court to "guard against undue
hindrances to political conversations and the exchange of ideas.'' The
restrictions "significantly inhibit communication with voters about proposed
political change.''

For example, she wrote, Colorado's requirement that signature gatherers be
registered voters "drastically reduces the number of persons, both volunteer
and paid, available to circulate petitions,'' and it restricts political
speech.

The decision was hailed by those who call the initiative process a
grassroots way to bring about political change.

Bill Orr, executive director of the American Constitutional Law Foundation,
which challenged the restrictions in a 1993 lawsuit, called the ruling a
"huge decision.''

"They basically said the state of Colorado is wrong,'' Orr said.

Orr contended that in recent years there has been an effort to exclude the
little guy from the initiative process.

"There has been an ongoing effort for the last decades to cripple this
process in the so-called holy name of avoiding fraud,'' Orr said. "The net
effect of these so-called rules and regulations is to make the process
virtually impossible for volunteer organizations. The number of petitions on
the Colorado ballot over the last seven years has precipitously declined
from the days prior to these regulations.

"We believe that this decision will go a long way in erasing that trend,''
Orr said.

Douglas Bruce, one of the state's biggest proponents of the initiative
system, said he felt particularly vindicated. He said the Legislature
implemented the restrictions "to prevent any kind of tax limitation or other
limited-government effort'' from ever being on the ballot.

Bruce said legislators were essentially telling voters: "We are going to
make the process so restrictive and so difficult that you can never put
anything on the (ballot) that we don't like.''

The state argued that the restrictions were necessary to prevent fraud.

Attorney General Gale Norton, who left office Tuesday, had told the high
court "there is every indication that without some reasonable regulation . .
. fraud and abuse could increase.''

Deputy Attorney General Maurice Knaizer said Tuesday that was the experience
of the state in 1992 when a federal judge temporarily stopped Colorado from
enforcing the registered voter provision.

"We found a tremendous increase in the number of complaints about
circulators either misrepresenting the petitions or making false statements
about the petitions,'' Knaizer said. "There was really no way we could track
that because we couldn't tie in a particular petition to a particular
circulator. We really had no way of tracking that down.''

This is not the first time Colorado's initiative rules have been struck down
by the U.S. Supreme Court. In 1988, the court struck down a restriction that
prohibited ballot sponsors from paying signature gatherers. Denver lawyer
Paul Kenneth Grant had challenged the restriction.

Grant, also involved in Tuesday's case, said the restriction requiring
circulators to wear badges violated "a long-standing American tradition,
which is the right to engage in anonymous political speech.''

Grant predicted that Tuesday's ruling would bring a strong reaction from
state legislators in the form of more restrictions.