Event Calendar

February 2012
(view month)

S	M	T	W	R	F	S
*	*	*	01	02	03	04
05	06	07	08	09	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	*	*	*

(add event)

User Blox 4

- Put stuff here

Barack Obama

"Lincoln Sells Out Slaves"
by: Rob Kailey - Sep 13
1 Comments

I Told You He Was No Good!
by: Rob Kailey - Jun 22

If You Haven't Seen This
by: Rob Kailey - Apr 28
5 Comments

Impeach the President?
by: Rob Kailey - Mar 16
15 Comments

It's the system, stupid!
by: Jay Stevens - Oct 25
7 Comments

Rob Kailey is a working schmuck with no ties or affiliations to any governmental or political organizations, save those of sympathy.

CI-100 Will Not Qualify for the Ballot

by: Matt Singer

Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 15:21:22 PM MST

Good news -- CI-100 did not qualify for the ballot in Montana. It needed nearly 45,000 signatures to qualify. So far, less than half that number have been verified -- and too few remain to be verified to allow them to cross that threshold.

This is a big victory for the pro-choice movement in Montana -- so hats off to them.

It's also good news for progressives of all stripes headed into this fall. Increasingly, one has to wonder just what exactly will motivate a conservative to turn out to the polls -- John McCain, Bob Kelleher?

Matt Singer :: CI-100 Will Not Qualify for the Ballot

Tags: CI-100, abortion, birth control, choice, Montana, ballot issues, Elections, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

CI-100 Will Not Qualify for the Ballot | 6 comments

Hoo-ray! (0.00 / 0)

This is good news for everyone.

What's the scoop? Not enough signatures? Disqualified signatures b/c of out-of-state sig gatherers? Should we expect a lawsuit?

by: Jay Stevens @ Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 22:24:22 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Not that I am an authority . . (4.00 / 1)

But I think I would have heard by now if there was a lawsuit. This morning I heard CI-100 only had 9,000 signatures. It is not a validaded number, and pure heresay, but one that I trust.

Because CI-100 was a Constitutional issue, it needed more signatures of citizens than an initiative would have, and fell far far short of that number.

by: Cece @ Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:09:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

9,000??? (0.00 / 0)

That's pathetic!

by: Jay Stevens @ Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 15:23:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hallelujah! (4.00 / 1)

Fabulous news. We went through one of these campaigns in 2006 in South Dakota (and will go through another one again in 08) and seriously, they're nasty.

by: Anna @ Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 22:34:03 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Do not... (4.00 / 1)

make the mistake of underestimating the Kelleher juggernaut!

by: dpogreba @ Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 22:57:29 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Woo Fricking Hoo (4.00 / 1)

In dis house we can party like it's 1999. And of course have an abortion afterwards ...

by: Rob Kailey @ Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 23:57:01 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

CI-100 Will Not Qualify for the Ballot | 6 comments

Make a New Account

Forget your username or password?

Poll

Voting. Useful or not?

Yes!
No!
Maybe, but only if you vote my way.
There are theories that ...
Meh ...

Results