Title: Marcus v. Myers (Certification)

State: oregon

Issuer: Oregon Supreme Court

Document:

FILED:  September 17, 2001 
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

LEWIS MARCUS,
		Petitioner,
	v.
HARDY MYERS,
Attorney General,
State of Oregon,
	Respondent.
(SC S48622)

	On modified ballot title filed September 7, 2001.* 
	Janet A. Metcalf, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed
the filing of modified ballot title for respondent.  With her on
the filing were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Michael D.
Reynolds, Solicitor General.
	No appearance by petitioner.
	Before Carson, Chief Justice, and Gillette, Durham, Leeson,
Riggs, and De Muniz, Justices. 
	The modified ballot title is certified.  The appellate
judgment shall issue in accordance with ORS 250.085(9).
	*332 Or 463, ___ P3d ___ (2001) (referring ballot title for
modification).
		The court in this ballot title review proceeding
determined that the Attorney General's certified ballot title for
a proposed initiative measure, which the Secretary of State
denominated as Initiative Petition 54 (2002), failed to comply
substantially with statutory standards.  Marcus v. Myers, 332 Or
463, ___ P3d ___ (2001).  Under Oregon Laws 2001, chapter 802,
section 2 (now codified as ORS 250.085(8)), the court referred
the ballot title to the Attorney General for modification.  The
Attorney General has filed a modified ballot title for the
proposed initiative measure, and no party to the ballot title
review proceeding has objected.  See ORS 250.085(9) (setting out
period within which party may object to modified ballot title and
requiring court to certify modified ballot title if no objection
filed).
	The modified ballot title for Initiative Petition 54
(2002) states:
"AMENDS CONSTITUTION:  ALLOWS REGISTERED VOTERS TO
SIGN INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM, AND RECALL PETITIONS BY
ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION OF 'SIGNATURE'
		"RESULT OF 'YES' VOTE:  'Yes' vote allows
registered voters to sign initiative, referendum, and
recall petitions by electronic transmission of
'signature'; continues to allow handwritten signatures.
		"RESULT OF 'NO' VOTE:  'No' vote rejects proposal
permitting registered voters to sign initiative,
referendum, and recall petitions by electronic
transmission of 'signature'; retains current law
allowing handwritten signatures.
		"SUMMARY:  Amends Constitution.  Current law
allows handwritten signatures on initiative,
referendum, and recall petitions, but does not provide
for 'signing' such petitions by electronic
transmission.  Measure allows voters to 'sign'
petitions by electronic transmission.  Electronic
transmission means computer transmission, through the
internet or other computer network.  'Electronic
signature' must include voter's name and residential
address, in substantial conformity with voter
registration information.  Until government provides
each voter a unique identifier, voter also must provide
contact information, such as e-mail address, telephone
number, which shall not become public record.  Election
officials must either validate or prove signatures
invalid using identifying information provided by
petition signer.  Legislature shall review electronic-petitioning process, and create new provisions to
standardize, but not hinder, process.  Other
provisions."
The modified ballot title is certified.  The appellate
judgment shall issue in accordance with ORS 250.085(9).