Comments on: Signing a petition is a public act

By: klthompson

klthompson — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:55:28 +0000

I sign just about every petition I see and I often vote the other way. I just like to see diverse items on the ballot. I don’t care if my name is released but if I am ever approached in a threatening way because I signed a petition that person will certainly regret it.

By: jimkingjr

jimkingjr — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:37:43 +0000

villager- so, we should reveal the individual votes on an initiative or referendum, too, since that is just as much a legislative act as when legislators actually vote? Reveal petitions and get rid of the secret ballot!

By: villager98

villager98 — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 10:24:16 +0000

Signing a petition to create, change or repeal a law is a legislative act and as such is, and should be, allowed as much secrecy as we allow the state’s legislators when they enact laws. If Joe and Jane Citizen shouldn’t be trying to legislate their personal beliefs and political positions if they don’t want to do it in public.

By: jimkingjr

jimkingjr — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 03:11:00 +0000

Average Joe and Jane citizen do not wantb to discuss their beliefs, or have their political positions open to discussion. It is the number one reason most people do not attend political party caucuses. They hold these things to be private.

The minority of us are out front and open about where we stand.

Stripping privacy from petitions further discourages the average person from participating in the political process. Period.

By: dltooley3

dltooley3 — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 00:20:09 +0000

Harassment of those involved in political activities definitely does happen.

Most likely these lists would be used to generate political profiles based on multiple datapoints. I assume that their are larger law firms that maintain such databases of those that testify – which is legal – even though harassment from same is definitely not.

A petition is definitely somewhere between public testimony and voting, hopefully the further discussion will be respectful of those that operate anonymously and seek to remain so, such as anon commenters here.

By: jimkingjr

jimkingjr — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 22:35:09 +0000

Very weak arguments, David. Agencies can put the language out there on commercial purposes, but the law does not support that. What will happen to an agency who refuses to produce a public record because a requestor refuses to sign any limitation on its use? Where does the Open Public Records Act give any agency any control over the use a requestor may make of any public record? That Toby Nixon failed to get any such language added to the law is simply more proof that no such restriction exists.

As for the “public act” argument- come on, David, you are better than taking the one type of case many people despise- the paid signature gatherer- and elevating it to the standard. Many signatures are signed in private places, are not gathered by a paid signature gatherer, or are signed with an expectation of privacy- an expectation strengthened by decades of precedent.

Your argument is no better than saying a voter who went tro the polls in a public place to take an action making law should have his vote revealed.

Signing is as much a private act as is voting.

I’m still looking for even one actual public good achieved by opening the petitions as public record. Just one.

So far the only actual results that appear possible are harassment and data-mining.