The Opinion Journal details a case in Oklahoma that certainly looks like a politically-motivated persecution. Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson, a Democrat, is charging three people who organized a drive to get a taxpayer's bill of rights into the ballot. Due to an arcane – and frankly unfair – rule, the signature drive was invalidated. Now the AG is going after the organizers in what looks very much like an intimidation campaign and an attempt to curry favor with Democratic activists and unions.
In 2005 Mr. Carpenter, a Tulsan, launched a signature campaign to get a state-wide vote on a Taxpayer Bill of Rights. Tabor, as it is known, would cap the rate at which state government spending could increase. Mr. Jacob and Ms. Johnson were later brought on board to assist the effort. Not surprisingly, politicians and interest groups that favor big government have developed an intense dislike for Tabor spending limits, even though, like lawmaker term limits, they tend to be popular with voters.
This certainly proved to be the case in Oklahoma. Despite strong opposition from organized labor especially, Tabor petition advocates managed to gather some 300,000 signatures from registered voters, far more than the 219,000 needed to get the measure on the state ballot. Following a court challenge, however, the signatures were invalidated, not because the signers weren't legitimate but because the Oklahoma Supreme Court determined that nonresidents of the state had collected signatures.
Ironically, it is perfectly legal for opponents of a petition to solicit money and manpower from out-of-state. And sure enough, public sector unions opposed to the Tabor initiative recruited people from outfits like the Oregon-based Voter Education Project, an offshoot of the AFL-CIO that specializes in countering signature drives. They also set up Web sites that advertised the location of signature-gathers and urged their members to harass them.
After the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled, Attorney General Edmondson could have let the matter die. Instead, he decided that the best use of scarce prosecutorial resources was to indict the petition campaigners. There's reason to believe his decision has less to do with enforcing the law and more to do with warning activists to think twice before challenging political elites.
It is more than ironic that organizers can only use residents but that opponents can bring in all the outside help they want. It is more than a little suspect that this prosecution just happens to be one that sends a signal of political intimidation while also apparently also gaining Edmondson favor with the people he needs to help him secure a nomination to higher office. It doesn't matter which party you belong to, this behavior is wrong. The courts should not become political weapons for any party.
