Home General North Dakota Bill to Prohibit Initiative Circulators who have Not Lived in North Dakota Three Years
formats

North Dakota Bill to Prohibit Initiative Circulators who have Not Lived in North Dakota Three Years

Published on February 3, 2013, by in General.

Six North Dakota legislators have introduced SB 2183, which makes it illegal for anyone to circulate an initiative, referendum, or recall petition if the circulator has not lived in the state for at least three years. Also the circulator must have voted in either of the last two North Dakota statewide elections. The sponsors are Senators David Hogue (R-Minot), Richard Wardner (R-Dickinson), and Representatives Al Carlson (R-Fargo), Larry Belew (R-Minot), Lawrence Klemin (R-Bismarck), and Mike Nathe (R-Bismarck). Thanks to Paul Jacob for this news.

7 Responses

  1. Joshua

    To be elected to the North Dakota legislature, one only has to have lived in the state for one year. I doubt they can find a rational basis why initiative circulators need to have lived there for three years.

  2. Demo Rep

    Each State in the *United* States of America regime continues to be a Sovereign Nation-State regime.

    1776 DOI last para.
    1777 Art. Confed.
    1783 U.S.A. – Brit Peace Treaty
    1787 Const – Art. I, Sec. 10 and esp. Art. VII.

    The durational stuff is a minor effort to require SOME sort of ALLEGIANCE to a regime

    — noting that LOTS of folks can NOT afford to move to get the Hell away from the regime in which they reside.

  3. kent bernbeck

    I will be sure to get a copy of Bernbeck v Moore (8th Circuit 1996)and Buckley v Am. Constit. Law (SCOTUS 1999) up to them.

  4. Andy

    How in the hell could this be constitutional? Should a person who moves to North Dakota have to wait for 3 years before they can vote?

    Gathering signatures on petitions is a free speech right. There should not be any time requirement in a geographic territory before one can engage in free speech activities.

    The intent of these legilators is clear, they are trying to make it more difficult to place initiatives on the ballot. They deserve to be removed from office over this.

  5. Gee, another attempt to limit the vote and all six sponsors are Republicans. What a surprise. If this starts popping up in other states it must be a coincidence rather than an orchestrated effort by the Koch Brothers or ALEC.

  6. icr

    I think it’s almost impossible to get an initiative on the ballot in deep blue IL. Isn’t it similar in other deep blue states like NY, NJ, MD and MA?

    The only solution is electing state legislatures by PR with a low threshold. FORBES just discovered 90 previously
    unknown billionaires in the US-just need one to finance a campaign for that purpose.

  7. Andy

    “icr Says:
    February 5th, 2013 at 5:45 pm

    I think it’s almost impossible to get an initiative on the ballot in deep blue IL. Isn’t it similar in other deep blue states like NY, NJ, MD and MA? ”

    Illinois only allows two types of initiatives. One is constitutional amendment, and the other are non-binding initiatives which suggest that the legislature take some type of action. They do not have statutory initiatives (which are to create or change statutory laws). Constitutional amendment initiatives in Illinois are limited in subject matter, I think that they are limited to procedural issues. I’ve also hear that it is difficult to get the legal language approved in Illinois. I don’t think that Illinois has a state wide citizens referendum process.

    New York and New Jersey do not have a state wide citizens initiative and referendum process.

    Maryland does not have a state wide referendum process, but they do have a state wide initiative process. I’ve heard that the legislature tries to block referendums from happening in Maryland by declaring bills emergencies which exempts them from referendums, although referendums do still happen there from time to time.

    Massachusetts does have a state wide initiative and referendum process. It is really difficult to get a state wide constitutional amendment initiative on the ballot in Massachusetts, but it is not so bad to get a state wide statutory intiative on the ballot in Massachusetts, and those type of initiatives qualify for the ballot there in pretty much every election.

    I’ve found that most state legislators in general do not like the initiative and referendum process. Why? Because they see it as a threat to their power. I’ve also found that in states where the Republicans tend to have more power, they are usually the ones attacking the initiative process, and in states where Democrats have the most power, they are the ones who attack the initiative process.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>