# ND Primary/6-10 SOLID NO on # 1!!!!!!!



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

This measure, #1, from the ND legislature would change the filing date of initiated petitions from 90 days to 120 days prior to the election.

The intent of the measure is to make it much more difficult for ND citizens to get measures on the ballot, as it would likely make the petition circulators miss the big events like the State Fair, which is a primary location in most petition drives. The legislature has a long history of animosity toward citizen petitions and multiple times they have made the process harder. It does the legislature little credit to so distrust the people who elect them to office.

Measure #1 deserves a NO vote on June 10th.

https://vip.sos.nd.gov/PortalListDetail ... tent-start


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Another case of politicians working against citizens. Government indeed needs to be watched. Often conservatives say this about liberals, and I always agree, but conservative politicians need watching too. You can't trust any of them. When caught they will try blame government employees or appointees. Much like the mess politicians have made of vet health care, then call for the resignation of everyone but a politician.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Measure 1 wasn't brought about by the politicians. When it comes to initiated measures and consitutional amendments, the Secretary of States Office has to work within the guidelines and parameters that the people give them. The system can only exist if the people are moral. What we have now is pretty lax.

The last couple of years some citizens have chosen to make a mockary out of it. High Fence Measure number one where gatherers filled in addresses zip codes and/or signed for their spouses etc. High Fence Measure number two where the Fair Chasers accepted out of state money from the Humane Society of the United States but they didn't run it through their account with the Secretary of States Office. To hide the source??

All this opened the door for HSUS to then move on to measure 5 where Stockmens had to spend $200,000 to fight HSUS and their $950,000.

And then there was the fiasco involving the NDSU football players with the Clean Water Wildlife Parks petition number one. And now the CWWPP number two is again using paid circulators. If they get the signatures one can only wonder what kind of campaign finance fiascos the state will have before the elections.

Ballot Measures are supposed to be a grass roots effort by the people. What Dick Monson Bruce Hanson David Brandt and a handful of others on this website have made obvious to the people is that system needs to be adjusted to stop the mischeif.

You guys need to own up. This measure one is direct fallout from the dishonest things you guys have been involved with the last couple of years. This States SoS Office is wripe for the pickings. Something needs to be done. I'm voting yes.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

So your saying making people wait longer will solve all this? That's like saying making medicine cost more makes it more affective.

My theory is the anti sportsmens groups like Farm Bureau have enough politicians in their pocket to resist the will of the people and they want to keep it that way.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Plainsman,

For some time there has been postings on this web-forum that reform is coming because of the mischeif by a small group of persons. You simply need to own up to why this has been brought about. Many organizations are leaning on their representatives to do something. Your actions and those to which you subscribe have been found repugnant to others.

Farm Bureau ran a clean campaign for their measure 3 to allow farmers to farm and ranchers to ranch. No forged signatures, no out of state money from nefarious sources, no scandals.

Plains, I believe you know why this measure one is being proposed to reform some loopholes. It was brought about because you fellows cannot be trusted to do the right thing the moral way.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

At statehood and after, North Dakota had a totally corrupt government run by out of state banks, grain millers and railroads. In the mid-teens the initiative process was passed into the state constitution by the League. Ever since the legislature has sought to shrink the initiative process because they hate the concept of the public's power to decide their own course. Since they can't get rid of initiative and referral, the intent is to make the process increasingly more difficult. Death of a thousand cuts.

Did I mention there is a second measure coming on this fall's election to weaken the process further?

Another double standard is that when a measure comes from the people, the sponsors put their name on it. When the legislature sends a measure down for the ballot they lack the courage to use their names. No balls.

Right now Big Oil runs North Dakota. Bought and sold. They want their taxes lowered and regulatory policy erased. How to accomplish that task? They can buy politicians but they fear the people's common sense, and need to cover their bases by weakening the measure process. Measure #1 is a power grab away from the people, pure and simple.

NO on Measure #1.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Measure #1 is a power grab away from the people, pure and simple.


I hope that anyone with a brain sees that. It's not only a power grab, it's arrogant and un-American. Those who want Measure #1 to pass are simply frustrated that the citizens can usurp their bought and paid for politicians. I suppose this happens in every state, but I think they are bought more cheaply in North Dakota. A fellow on fishingbuddy thought he could buy me with a couple of shots of Black Label.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Dick wrote,



> At statehood and after, North Dakota had a totally corrupt government run by out of state banks, grain millers and railroads. In the mid-teens the initiative process was passed into the state constitution by the League.


The Non=Partisan League helped create the Bank of ND, the State Mill and Elevator other Co-ops etc. What a great idea. Then I believe it was in the 1950's the League was absorbed into the Democrat party. Not so great.



> Ever since the legislature has sought to shrink the initiative process because they hate the concept of the public's power to decide their own course. Since they can't get rid of initiative and referral, the intent is to make the process increasingly more difficult. Death of a thousand cuts.


This isn't coming from the legisltors by themselves. The people are requesting changes because the last couple of years things are getting out of control.



> Did I mention there is a second measure coming on this fall's election to weaken the process further?


This isn't about weakening the process as much as it is about discouraging out of State interests from coming here and creating so many problems. It costs ND residents time and treasure to fight all this nonsense.



> Another double standard is that when a measure comes from the people, the sponsors put their name on it. When the legislature sends a measure down for the ballot they lack the courage to use their names. No balls.


You have put your name on several ballot drives and have not won a single one. Must be shooting blanks.



> Right now Big Oil runs North Dakota. Bought and sold. They want their taxes lowered and regulatory policy erased. How to accomplish that task? They can buy politicians but they fear the people's common sense, and need to cover their bases by weakening the measure process. Measure #1 is a power grab away from the people, pure and simple.


I see you take no responsiblity in all the drama that has happened the last couple elections.

Yes on Measure #1


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> This isn't coming from the legisltors by themselves. The people are requesting changes because the last couple of years things are getting out of control.


Only the people who have a legislator or two in their pocket. You either go initiated measure, or you have pull in the legislature. The average Joe in North Dakota has finally understood that there are things he can do in his interest. Your trying to stop the average Joe. One only understand that guys like you are not here to talk with sportsmen, you are here for your own self interest. You don't talk deer hunting, you don't talk fishing, you don't talk rifles. Your here for one reason only and that's your wallet. Now if you can just get enough people suckered. I don't think running down Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants Forever, The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation etc is going to convince sportsmen your one of the good guys.

Because you oppose pro sportsmen bills and initiatives Shaug what's the difference having you posting on a hunting and fishing website as compared to PETA?


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

My take is that this may have come as a request from the AG, but it clearly was and is intended to do an end around of the initiated measure and move more control back into the Leg hands. When I heard this the first thought I had was this is intended to take the State Fair in Minot out of play for anyone.

One only needs to look at the numbers collected there to understand this. So shaug and others like it or not the truth of the matter is exactly what Dick said!

No amount of BS shaug is going to change the fact that this is an attempt to stop grass roots orgs from being able to affect any change other than through the Leg which is BULL**** PERIOD!


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Sportsmen better get off their duff and vote no on this one. I hope it's very evident that the people supporting this are trying to steal our freedom and subvert the very essence of democracy. It is supposed to be we the people, not we with enough money to buy a politician.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

I had a chance to visit with one of the good legislators this morning. Big Oil is scared stiff of the initiative process. More oil taxes? More regulation? An initiative backlash from the people could cut their fat hog in the butt. Measure #1 would limit the people's checks and balances on state government excesses.

NO on #1 in the June primary.

Measure #4 on the Nov. ballot is even more injurious to citizens, as it removes the citizen's abilities to set finical objectives of spending.

Measure #4, STATEMENT OF INTENT
The measure would require that initiated measures that are estimated to have a significant fiscal impact 
must be placed on the general election ballot. The measure also would prohibit the approval for 
circulation of any petition to initiate a constitutional amendment that would make a direct appropriation 
of public funds for a specific purpose or require the legislative assembly to appropriate funds for a 
specific purpose.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Dick, I don't believe the oil companies are scared stiff. You over exaggerate things.



> The measure also would prohibit the approval for
> circulation of any petition to initiate a constitutional amendment that would make a direct appropriation
> of public funds for a specific purpose or require the legislative assembly to appropriate funds for a
> specific purpose.


A democracy cannot work once the people learn they can gift to themselves largesse from the general treasury.

Dick, you guys need to own up that these measures were brought about your misdeeds and mischeif.

Yes on #1 and yes on #4.

I support initiated measures and constitutional amendments and for the masses to have an avenue for redress of grievances if the people feel the legislature isn't listening. However, you guys (a small handfull) have obused the system and now everyone loses a little bit of their freedoms because of the actions of a few.

Initiated measures and constitutional amendments are supposed to be a grassroots movement with lots of persons on the same side of an issue. It shouldn't be used by a handfull of people who know how to run smear campaigns or as a dirty war against someone they disagree with.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

You know Shaug if they really wanted to help they wouldn't make it harder, but they would include a packet with do's and don'ts for initiative supporters. Often one signs up and it's the last you hear from anyone. it's sort of running blind. The extension of time is simply a way to discourage people not help anything.



> A democracy cannot work once the people learn they can gift to themselves largesse from the general treasury.


I know what your saying, and we don't have a democracy we have a republic. Democrats like to confuse that because their very name implies they may be more in tune with our form of government. Not true. Actually if we had a democracy we would all vote on everything rather than having representatives. However, when our representatives try take power from the people they are subverting the very essence of a democracy or a republic. The idea you presented has been debated since this nation formed. A better way to solve the problem is only let those who pay taxes vote.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Plains wrote,



> I know what your saying, and we don't have a democracy we have a republic.


Yep.



> Actually if we had a democracy we would all vote on everything rather than having representatives.


You just contradicted yourself. You want representative government until that is, when it comes to the Oli Revenue Rip Off, then you want majority rule. A vote of the sheeple watching several million dollars worth of TV ads to sway their opinion. To date, the peolple have not been swayed by your small group. But it was Mike McEnroe who said after losing the fair chase folly, "in losing we have found what it takes to win. Initiated measures are won by whomever spends the most." Not verbatim but he said something to that effect.



> A better way to solve the problem is only let those who pay taxes vote.


No representation without taxation.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> You just contradicted yourself.


No I didn't. In a republic one would expect our representatives to actually represent us. I think our legislature is not made up of people that represent all North Dakotan's. They are not balanced and as such represent what best profits them. When that happens we use the initiative process. That's why those who are receiving pampering while shafting the rest of us want measure #1 and 4. It's a power grab to keep the average citizen from being represented. It's what those in power do when they fear the people. They start creating road blocks.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Plains wrote,



> No I didn't. In a republic one would expect our representatives to actually represent us.


They do represent the people, unless what you want is unreasonable. Or would be to the benefit of only a few while being detrimental to the many. Throw a trantrum if you want to, if I were a legislator I certainly wouldn't give you or Dick or Ron much.

For instance, Representative Todd Porter. He carried a lot of water over the years, only to have pretend sportsmens orgs try to throw him under the bus on HB 1278. The Outdoor Heritage Fund. You guys burned a bridge. Smooth move exlacs.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I don't know Porter, but your telling me he is vindictive and will shaft all citizens to get back at a couple that hurt his feelings?


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Plainsman said:


> I don't know Porter, but your telling me he is vindictive and will shaft all citizens to get back at a couple that hurt his feelings?


No, that is not how Todd Porter operates. He runs the fairest hearings in his committee that I have seen in Bismarck, regardless of who is testifying. I think he has the general population's best interest at heart. I don't think he liked the way 1278 turned out any more that conservation groups like it, but likely for different reasons.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Dick Monson said:


> Plainsman said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know Porter, but your telling me he is vindictive and will shaft all citizens to get back at a couple that hurt his feelings?
> ...


 Thanks Dick. That's good to know. I'm pleased it's not the picture Shuag painted.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Plainsman said,



> I don't know Porter, but your telling me he is vindictive and will shaft all citizens to get back at a couple that hurt his feelings?





> Thanks Dick. That's good to know. I'm pleased it's not the picture Shuag painted.


You mean the picture you painted. I merely pointed out what transpired.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> For instance, Representative Todd Porter. He carried a lot of water over the years, only to have pretend sportsmens orgs try to throw him under the bus on HB 1278. The Outdoor Heritage Fund. You guys burned a bridge. Smooth move exlacs.


Your picture Shaug. You say a bridge was burned. So your saying because a (in your words a pretend sportsmens orgs) didn't go along with him he's going to take it out on sportsmens groups next time. That's what a burned bridge is. Your picture Shaug.

Anyone have an email for Porter?


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Plains wrote,



> Anyone have an email for Porter?


You are much too late. The Republican State Convention was the first weekend in April. We had a nice chat. I may have said some things and poured a little fuel on the burning bridge. Can't remember.......I was dr*nking alcohol.


----------



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

Interesting discussion and I can see points well argued from both sides. The one concern I have regards Shaug's statement "....now everyone loses a little bit of their freedoms because of the actions of a few. "
And that may end up being a true statement. But isn't that argument for the proposed restriction frighteningly similar to proposals to restrict firearms? The abuses by a few justify the loss of freedom for all?
It will be interesting to see if the people of ND will surrender freedom just because some choose to abuse it.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

shaug said:


> Plains wrote,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Now your drawing me another picture.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Seems odd to me that our politicians or anyone would fear out of state interests interfering in North Dakota's business when you look at the millions $$$$ that poured in during the last Senate and House races..... It's the old horse branded with the double standard (sort of like the figure 8 laying on it's side) and it is ridden to death Dwight.

Remember that consortium of "North Dakota Oil Interests" that raised the big whoop up a couple months ago? All out of state oil barons and nooooobody said a peep. Again, odd how that works. Maybe you missed that one?

No on #1 and we all get to vote tomorrow. Well, all of us except the folks that have been disenfranchised by the new voter ID laws. I guess the old folks who lived here all their lives must be a threat too.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I guess the old folks who lived here all their lives must be a threat too.


I resemble that remark. :thumb:


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Dick wrote,



> No on #1 and we all get to vote tomorrow. Well, all of us except the folks that have been disenfranchised by the new voter ID laws. I guess the old folks who lived here all their lives must be a threat too.


We have had to show our ID to vote for quite a few years where I live in ND. The gaggle that has always sat at the table when you walk in to vote has known me and each other all of our lives. Do they also have to prove to each other who they are? lol

However, outside of our small communities, people don't know their neighbors who live in the precinct.


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

I know Todd Porter personally and he's pretty fair,but he's close to the oil industry in that he's a good buddy with Ron Ness who is well known to promise things, give his personal word about things, then go back on his word with a smile to get what he personally wants no matter what the cost or who he hurts! Ron portrays himself as a Sportsman, but IMEO he'd throw other sportsmen under the bus in 1/4 second if it benefitted himself personally or his employers, the big oil companies. 
But Todd is pretty honest and forthright, BUT he's a politician with close ties to oil and the controlling party,


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

17.13% of eligible voters cast ballots in North Dakota this election. The biggest loss of the day was that turnout. Not even 1 out of 5. Unbelievable.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

http://results.sos.nd.gov/resultsSW.asp ... SW&map=CTY

Pay the teacher. I'll have my saspirilla in a tall clean glass.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

It wasn't that big of a deal, but I'll bet some who voted yes will live to regret it. I will admit I am surprised that people who think they are independent would give up their power, much less turn more of it over to politicians. I guess we are getting more liberal than I thought. Power from people to government is always a liberal move.


----------

