LANSING – Reform Michigan Government Now! filed just shy of 500,000 signatures Monday with the Department of State, and already some of the state’s top constitutional and elections lawyers are looking for holes that could keep the issue off the ballot.

Though no committee has been formed to oppose the measure that would make a number of changes to the structure of state government, several attorneys confirmed they were looking at, and finding potential legal issues with, the proposal. Supporters, meanwhile, maintained the proposal was essentially immune to judicial review because the changes to the judiciary it includes would create a conflict of interest.

“Reform Michigan Government Now! will help end the partisan bickering and unfair special-interest influence in government,” RMGN Executive Director Joe Lukasiewicz said. “The special interests will try to block the will of the people. And because every judge has a conflict of interest, the courts should stand aside and let the people decide in November on reforming Michigan’s broken government.”

Attorney Peter Ellsworth, who has been active in election law and constitutional issues in the state for some 30 years, said the idea that courts could not review the proposal without creating a conflict of interest was “ridiculous”. He said the courts by necessity would have to address any issues raised because there was no other body to review the concerns.

Ellsworth said he had a number of concerns to raise on the petition form, but was not yet ready to discuss them.

Robert LeBrant, general counsel for the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, expected the proposal would spend at least the next month, maybe two, working its way through the certification process. He noted that would mean additional time before the group had to disclose its donors.

“We’ll take a look at (the signatures). We’ll take a look at some of the constitutional issues. We’ll take a look at is the petition in fact in a proper form,” LeBrant said. “I can’t imagine this thing’ll be certified till the end of August.”

Of primary concern to LeBrant is the breadth of the proposal. “We think it’s a general revision of the Michigan Constitution that’s reserved to the calling of a constitutional convention,” he said.

He said the constitutional provision allowing for voter-initiated amendments implies a single subject, similar to that required for legislation.

Reform Michigan, which needed to collect 380,126 valid voter signatures to get the issue on the ballot, issued a press release Monday afternoon announcing the filing and launched its website, www.reformmichigangovernmentnow.com, but remained mum on who was backing the effort.

The issue is not who is backing the proposal, but that it represents change voters want, supporters said. Among the changes is reducing the size of, and pay for, the Legislature and state courts, as well as the pay for top elected officials. It also would limit their ability to lobby after leaving office.

Redistricting under the proposal would be conducted by an independent panel rather than by the Legislature. It would also reduce the number of state departments and limit the number of boards and commissions.

“Nearly half-a-million Michigan citizens from all backgrounds – Republican, Democrat and independent – support these reform measures and are calling for us to fix our broken government,” said Harland Nye, campaign treasurer. “As a lifelong Republican, I firmly believe these reforms are at the core of building good government that will eliminate waste, increase accountability and make our elected officials listen to the people, not the special interests.”

The group was not ready, however, to release a list of supporters, said spokesperson Diane Byrum. “At this point just getting ready to launch our grassroots campaign,” she said, adding that financial backers will be released when the group files its campaign finance statements.

Political opposition also continued against the proposal. Michigan Republican Party Chair Saul Anuzis said the group at this point should be willing to disclose its primary backers. “So far, the backers of the stealth petition have refused to identify themselves and who is funding them,” he said in a statement on the signature filing. “This should raise serious ‘Red Flags’ about the group’s motives and intentions.”

Anuzis continued to argue that, given the manner in which the proposal reduces the number of judges and justices, it is an attempt for Democrats to gain control of the courts.

Democratic lawmakers reportedly had two conference calls on the issue over the weekend to raise concerns with Governor Jennifer Granholm and Democratic Party Chair Mark Brewer over both the contents of the constitutional amendment and the conduct of the campaign.

Officials would not disclose the nature of the conference call discussions, but Granholm press secretary Liz Boyd said the governor has not changed her stance on the proposal: not exactly in favor but not opposed.

“The governor’s inclination is to vote for a new constitutional convention when that option is presented to voters in 2010,” Boyd said.

Boyd said Ms. Granholm supports such elements as no-reason absentee voting, the non-partisan redistricting, the ban on lobbying directly out of office, and the reduction in the size of government. But she opposes reducing judicial salaries and is concerned that the proposal would reduce minority representation and is attempting to amend too much of the Constitution at once.

“A number of Democratic leaders feel as the governor does,” Boyd said.

This story was provided by Gongwer News Service. To subscribe, click on Gongwer.Com

a>>