MIN CHC 1989-02-15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

the reasons were, and they made it quite simple . And it is regretable that it was all turned down because most of them were quite sensible and there were just a couple that were controversial and that generated the opposition. One of the. . . some of the council members suggested that what they should have. . . should do is take the controversial ones and list them separately. And then kind of have a patch- all for all the ones that were basically housekeeping or, you know, fairly uncontroversial ones . So I suppose that would be an alternative too , to package it that way. But basically I think the best approach is to , you know, offer the voters as much information and fully. . . give them as many choices as possible . Most . . . the ' 78 Con-Con ballot was challenged after the vote was taken. There was litigation that went to the Hawaii Supreme Court . And the Hawaii Supreme Court basically upheld it saying, well , we have to again rely upon the good sense of the voters . This isn' t particularly something the courts can work out very well . If a mistake was made, as an easy political remedy, you can put this thing back in the ballot and have another election. And that ' s tended to be the way courts have handled this . There are very few cases in which courts have overturned those . One case where they did--and maybe it ' s worth mentioning-- in Tennessee they were . . .voted whether or not the county should allow liquor by the drink. It kind of boggled the area. And the people putting it on the ballot obviously were not in favor of this and so they hada symbol by the place where you can vote . And if you wanted to allow liquor by the drink, the symbol was a serpent . And if you wanted to keep the county dry, the symbol was a Bible . That was something. And so the court in that case said it was unfair, misleading to the voters . But you know, if you can avoid something that extreme, you probably can get away with anything. But the best advice is try to be as fair as possible. BETHEA: But have you seen other language other than this for-and-against thing? I found that that was a great big source of confusion in these initiatives . People never know. I mean, for-and-against , and you get double negatives in there and all this other type of stuff, whereas something that could he talked about , yes or no, and I just don' t have the experience about whether or not there ' s other language that you could put on the ballot that would be a whole lot clearer than. . . VAN DYKE: People, I mean, in. . .generally in speaking nationally, people instinctively have tended to vote no when they don' t understand things . So you do. . . I m just looking for the ones I have , yeah, the ' 82 . Honolulu one was yes and no. If that makes any difference . 120