Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Fraud taints (Massachusetts) antigay measure

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » GLBT Donate to DU
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 06:05 PM
Original message
Fraud taints (Massachusetts) antigay measure
"...As the state's chief elections officer, the secretary should have denied certification of this antigay measure until he had conducted a thorough investigation into these allegations. The public should be assured that our ballot initiative process is free of manipulation and deceit. At the present time, the evidence suggests it is not..."



Dear Friends,

Our campaign for Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is in the news today.

Check out this Boston Globe op-ed in which I argue that the incumbent should not have certified the signatures for the anti-gay marriage ballot measure in light of significant documentation of fraud in the signature gathering process:

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

We look forward to keeping you updated! Have a wonderful holiday season!

Keep on,



John

P.S. We need your help to move us forward! If you have not already done so, please contribute today at www.johnbonifaz.com, and please urge your friends and colleagues to join us as well. Massachusetts law allows individuals to contribute up to $500 per calendar year. Your contribution today, within this calendar year limit, is critical to help us demonstrate our early viability!

The following op-ed was published in today's Boston Globe. Printed here in full with permission of the author.

http://www.johnbonifaz.com/node/171

Fraud taints antigay measure
By John C. Bonifaz | December 22, 2005

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.

From the ratification of the Massachusetts Constitution to open town meetings, direct democracy -- participation of the people -- has deep roots in the history of this Commonwealth. But, in order to maintain the people's trust, the process must be safeguarded against fraud. If people begin not to trust the fairness and legitimacy of the electoral process, our democracy is threatened.

In response to the multiple complaints about the use of deceptive practices with the antigay marriage ballot measure, state Senator Edward Augustus and state Representative Anthony Petruccelli, the co-chairs of the Legislature's Joint Committee on Election Laws, have put forward a bill (S. 2251) to help rout out fraud in the gathering of signatures for ballot questions. This bill is a necessary first step to protect the process for the future.

In this case, however, we are dealing with a proposed ballot measure -- one that would deny basic equality to a great many couples in Massachusetts -- that remains under a cloud of impropriety.

As the state's chief elections officer, the secretary should have denied certification of this antigay measure until he had conducted a thorough investigation into these allegations. The public should be assured that our ballot initiative process is free of manipulation and deceit. At the present time, the evidence suggests it is not.

John C. Bonifaz is the founder of the National Voting Rights Institute and a Democratic candidate for Massachusetts secretary of state.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 06:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. The Right Wing's Intolerance
is intolerable. These folks really need to grow up and mind their own business.

I would just love to see an extensive research done on the people who are so bent on taking gay rights away. I bet each and every one of them has a few skeletons in their closets. Then again, I believe their homophobia stems from some sexual identity crisis of their own.

We are all beginning to feel these Right Wingers tend to protest a bit too much about other's sexuality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I agree (n/t).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brian_Expat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-23-05 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. This is already being done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-23-05 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. It's Being Done, But for Politicians too?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brian_Expat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-23-05 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. That was in the last election
Politicians are quite clear that nobody who opposed the hate amendment lost their seats, but a large number who supported it did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-23-05 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
3. I don't get it
Here we have a candidate for public office that is busting his butt for civil rights and election reform, yet, in dual postings in the GLBT and Massachusetts forums, there have been a grand total of 2 responses in 18 hours?

Let's kick this, people. Give it a few nominations so others will see this. Email to friends and activists. All gay rights and civil libertarian and voting rights activists need to know about John's campaign for Massachusetts Secertary of State.

www.johnbonifaz.com

...and if you want to know what qualifies him to be Sec of State, go to www.nvri.org and www.afterdowningstreet.org.

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 11th 2024, 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » GLBT Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC