Today, the Wall Street Journal has a great piece by John Fund, describing the evils of BAMN and Dillon’s thugs. Both groups have aggressively used thug like tactics to stop political speech in the initiative process.

Just read the quote from a BAMN director admitting she is against democracy. She believes your right to free speech ends the moment you disagree with her.

“The key to defeating the initiative is to keep it off the ballot in the first place,” says Donna Stern, Midwest director for the Detroit-based By Any Means Necessary (BAMN). “That’s the only way we’re going to win.”

If this isn’t outrageous enough read what about a BAMN volunteer tells a petition circulator.

“If you give me your signatures, we’ll leave you alone,” says a BAMN volunteer on one tape to someone who’s earning money by circulating several different petition.

Want to read more?

Read The Far Left’s War on Direct Democracy

            Stopballotfraud.com, a Web site dedicated to slurring and slandering the message of those supporting civil rights initiatives, alleges paid gatherer National Ballot Access is fraudulently gathering signatures this summer. But there’s no proof, and allegations are all they can make. 

-         In Nebraska, Stop Ballot Fraud complains the civil rights initiative kick-off was too “quiet,” and that students were protesting.

-          In Missouri, they’ve complained that CRI petitions were circulated with petitions against eminent domain and stem-cell research. 

There are lots of issues, and only so many circulators. What’s wrong with circulating a few petitions at once?

Voters should know stopballotfraud.com is run by the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, an organization directly supported by the far-from-impartial leaders of Big Labor. When a blocker gets in a petition signer’s face, or moves to take legal action against a civil rights initiative, they always assert their independence, as an interested citizen. But voters need to know about the gorilla, driven by outdated ideology, that’s backing them.

            On the By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) Web site, there’s a description of their tactics in Arizona during the next few days, before the petition is validated August 3:

“In just the past 6 weeks in Arizona, we have been blocking signature gatherers in 110-120 degree weather, exposing the ACRI’s voter fraud, getting circulators and leaders in the petition company to come forward and reveal election violations that they and others have committed around the ACRI. We have also filed a preemptive lawsuit that is a part of our petition challenge.”

             Their hope? To invalidate 5 percent of the 330,000 signatures submitted on July 3. (That’s 100,000 more than the required number).

           It’s sad, but unsurprising, that BAMN tried to block the very submission of the petition to the Secretary of State, and civil rights petitioners had to make special arrangements to drop off the signatures.

            And it’s telling BAMN so effortlessly moves to legal action and invalidation. While the Secretary of State’s office should check for bad signatures, BAMN methods prove they’re going to use any means necessary – and it seems even they might admit those means are shameless, unfair and illegal.

ACORN, an organization known for its heavy handed voter fraud tactics, was recently caught on tape harrassing petitioners and blocking free speech.

This video shows an individual admitting he is an employee of ACORN blocking free speech in broad daylight.

BAMN claims they can keep civil rights initiatives off the ballot in Nebraska, Arizona and Colorado. They cite initiative opponents “successful” track record: initiative proponent Ward Connerly’s group had to withdraw from efforts in Missouri and Oklahoma, after signatures didn’t come fast enough.

BAMN would do well to remember what happened in Michigan in 2006, when they brought suit in federal court to keep a CRI off the ballot, and lost.

Badly.

If you want to stop a CRI initiative, you can call it fraud, sling it with accusations of “misleading,” or “lies,” or physically get in the way of those excercising their right to support it.

But they tend to get on the ballot anyway, and they tend to be passed.

Overwhelmingly.

Check out this recent editorial from Phoenix’s East Valley Tribune. The Arizona Civil Right Initiative is in; it’s passed; it’s on the ballot. So now blockers are trying to get it off, complaining that “civil rights” in the title misleads the voters of the state, who are clearly incapable of judging the bill on their own. A group opposing the initiative filed against it in court last week.

What does the editorial board of the Tribune say?

“We’ll set aside for another day whether affirmation action hurts or helps. But BAMN has offered a grave insult to petition signers by claiming they couldn’t figure out what the proposed amendment would do and a judge needs to protect voters from themselves.”

“Even a quick glance at the written details tells the average person where the initiative is headed. Just to pile up the slurs on Arizonan intellect, BAMN chairwoman Shanta Driver admitted to Capitol Media Services she’s also worried too many voters are simply racist.”

“The courts should quickly knock down this ridiculous lawsuit, with a bag of hammers if necessary.”

BAMN? Wait … who? That’s right, it’s the obnoxious group from Michigan that shows up in CRI states, complains about out-of-state support, and annoys and assaults petition gatherers.

It’s clear the board of the Tribune is one group of Arizonians they haven’t hoodwinked.

This week the Ninth Circuit court unanimously ruled in Nader v. Brewer that Arizona’s state residency requirement for petition circulators is unconstitutional. The courts decision immediately affects those states in the same circuit, Alaska, California, Montana, North Dakota, all who have similar restrictions.

The three-judge panel court struck down Arizona’s statutory requirement – which established that only Arizona state residents could circulate petitions – because it violated citizens right to political speech under the First and Fourteenth Amendment.

The case Nader v. Brewer was brought by independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader and Donald Daien, an Arizona supporter of his 2004 campaign.

This court decision in Nader is wonderful!

The government has no business regulating who can or can’t circulate petitions, it’s absurd.