Update On The Ballot Language For The Tax Cut Measure
Here are some interesting quotes from around North Dakota about the controversy surrounding the ballot language for the initiated measure to cut state income taxes (you can catch up here).
First up, state Senate Majority Leader Bob Stenehjem comes down in favor of the tax cut activists:
Senate Majority Leader Bob Stenehjem, R-Bismarck, said the Legislature would likely address the errors if the measure is passed this fall, calling them an “obvious numbers mistake.”
“The people that put it on the ballot, I think they all believed, thought, knew they were signing a petition that would reduce income tax by 50 percent,” Stenehjem said. “And hidden in all those words were some errors and I don’t know why those can’t be corrected.”
Glad to know Senator Stenehjem is on the side of the tax cutters, and would support tax cuts in the legislature.
Next, state Secretary of State Al Jaeger says it isn’t his job to “proofread” the language on the petition.
Americans for Prosperity said in a news release Friday that Jaeger should have used the same ballot language he approved for their petition in July 2007. Dustin Gawrylow of AFP said Jaeger should defer to what the intent was of the original ballot language that appeared on petition.
Jaeger disagrees. First of all, he said, he had no authority under state law, nor obligation, to proofread the entire text of the measure that sponsors wrote when they started their petition drive in 2007.
The problem with Jaeger’s assertion is that it is, in fact, his job to proofread the petitions.
The petition that was circulated in support of this measure included ballot language on it that was written by state Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem and approved by the Secretary of State’s office. If the SoS’s office isn’t going to read the petition, why even bother to have them approve the ballot language?
AFP made a typo in the petition. There’s no doubt about that. But neither the state Attorney General’s office nor the Secretary of State’s office caught the error despite being legally obliged to review petitions, and the two offices jointly wrote and/or approved the ballot language that petition signers read before signing the petition.
This is a comedy of errors, and I think the only practical thing to do is to go with the ballot language the Secretary of State’s office originally approved for the petition.
di butler
Chief RZ
Hungry Bear
Bike Bubba
Carrick
Gene
Kenny
