|
Dedicated to the
|
---|
- Click here for our audio downloadpage. |
|
Missouri First Home |
Principled Policy: CleanER MissouriThe ballot measure called "Clean Missouri" was a Constitutional mess, but the Republican solution violates some of the same principles and injects an additional problem or two. |
|
The Constitutional Approach to Clean Missouri February 10, 2020 CleanER Missouri Should Respect the Voters To anyone who cares about the letter and spirit of the Missouri Constitution, the 2018 ballot measure called “Clean Missouri” was a grave insult, but voters are about to be dealt a more grievous discourtesy. Republicans in the Missouri General Assembly are rightly concerned about the redistricting component of the 2018 constitutional amendment and are dead set on giving voters a chance to reverse it. Unfortunately, they learned too well from the cagey proponents of Clean Missouri. Like slick salesmen, they are calling their alternative “CleanER Missouri.” Sadly, CleanER Missouri is actually more despicable than Clean Missouri. The proponents of Clean Missouri baited voters with a new lobbyist gift limit of $5, a provision banning former legislators and their staff from lobbying for two years after leaving those jobs, a reduction on campaign contributions, and other sweeteners. Bait and Switch That bait was dangled so they could hook the voters with their real objective – a rather stupid new redistricting scheme that makes the whole state one murky political blob, rather than respect the distinctions that make communities vibrant, and affects who they choose to represent them. CleanER Missouri also baits voters. It uses a technically accurate ballot summary statement that is intentionally misleading. For instance, the summary statement, the only thing most voters will see, says CleanER Missouri would eliminate “all” lobbyist gifts, leaving the unsuspecting voter unaware that Clean Missouri has already set a gift limit at a measly $5. And the CleanER Missouri summary statement says that the amendment reduces campaign contribution limits, but it doesn't say that it's only by $100 and only for senate races. It's like fishing with plastic worms. Unlike those of CleanER Missouri, at least Clean Missouri's “baits” had substance. Going from unlimited lobbyist gifts to $5, and a two year wait between making laws and being hired by the people trying to influence the making of laws are substantive changes, whether they are a good idea or not. The fact that CleanER Missouri misleads voters with inconsequential changes pitched to sound like substantive changes makes the General Assembly's measure even more despicable than the crummy measure they seek to "fix." It's just not honest. What's more, like Clean Missouri, CleanER Missouri violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the Missouri Constitution, which requires ballot measures to include only one subject. CleanER Missouri proponents do, at least, have a more sensible objective. CleanER Missouri does get rid of a lot of the stupid redistricting methodology and even establishes some very reasonable standards for drawing district lines, but at the same time it squeezes all third parties out of the process, even if those third parties some day grow to almost 1/3 of the electorate, by allowing unelected insiders from the two (only two) largest political parties decide who draws district lines. The political class is asking voters to trust them with redistricting, but doing so with a deceptive ballot measure that violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the Constitution is no way to do it. Principled Policy The operative principle is enshrined in the very first clause of the Missouri Constitution's Bill of Rights: "In order to assert our rights, acknowledge our duties, and proclaim the principles on which our government is founded, we declare: To be principled, a ballot measure must be a true measure of the will of the people. That's why Article VII Secton 2(b) of the Missouri Constitution also prohibits ballot measures from including more than one subject: The operative principle is enshrined in the very first clause of the Missouri Constitution's Bill of Rights:
Clean Missouri was full of bad ideas, the worst of which is, in fact, the crazy redistricting plan. Fortunately, there is a principled way to address the problem – and it's quite simple. Since the only certain thing is that there is no way to be certain which of the several subjects in Clean Missouri voters really wanted, voters should be given another chance to voice their true will one issue at a time. Clean Missouri was full of bad ideas, the worst of which is, in fact, the crazy redistricting plan. Fortunately, there is a principled way to address the problem – and it's quite simple. Since the only certain thing is that there is no way to be certain which of the several subjects in Clean Missouri voters really wanted, voters should be given another chance to voice their true will one issue at a time. CleanER Missouri Should: 1) Put the redistricting question, and that alone, back before the voters. 2) Propose a redistricting plan that does not grant a monopoly to the two major political parties.
### |
Guiding Principles:
"In order to assert our rights, acknowledge our duties, and proclaim the principles on which our government is founded, we declare: That all political power is vested in and derived from the people; that all government of right originates from the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole.” Article I Section 1.
"No such proposed amendment shall contain more than one amended and revised article of this constitution, or one new article which shall not contain more than one subject and matters properly connected therewith." Art. VII § 2(b)
CleanER Missouri Should: 1) Put the redistricting question, and that alone, back before the voters. 2) Propose a redistricting plan that does not grant a monopoly to the two major political parties.
|
583