FreePaulJacob.com has already tackled the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center (BISC) and its dumb attacks on Paul Jacob in several previous blog entries (for example, here and here and here). Off-point, silly sallies seem to be all the BISC boys can muster, but for the record, here’s a rundown of charges in BISC’s kit bag as purveyed on their fraudulently named stopballotfraud.com site.

WHAT BISC SAYS: “Paul Jacob is a long-time lieutenant for ultra libertarian causes like legislative and judicial term limits, strict tax caps that bankrupt state government, and the removal of land use policies that protect the environment while allowing for growth.”

ANSWER: Uh…term limits is an “ultra-libertarian cause”? We’ll accept that over, say, “ultra-authoritarian” or “ultra-commie,” but does BISC really mean to imply that the majority of the voting public—who, after all, are the ones who pass term limits when they have the chance and who keep supporting term limits and fending off politicians’ attempts to undo term limits—are all “ultra-libertarian”?

Also, how many state governments so far have been “bankrupted” by tax caps? (None.) And anyway, isn’t it possible to cut government spending also?

And what’s with the bit about “removal of land-use policies”? No initiative Paul Jacob has worked on would have “removed land-use policies.” Sure, he’s sought to counter eminent-domain abuse and to require compensation of property owners when governments dictate the use of their property. This belief of Paul’s that individuals have property rights that should be respected helps make him a bad guy in the eyes of BISC and thus motivates their tendentious fictionalization of his track record, not to mention their desire to imprison him. Now, Paul may be guilty of respect for the rights of others, what’s true is true. But try to look on the bright side here, BISC: he respects the rights of others.

Finally, it’s really out of order to dub Paul Jacob a mere lieutenant of the ultra-whatever causes he’s advocated. He is a former president of U.S. Term Limits and, currently, in addition to being a senior advisor with the Sam Adams Alliance, is the president of Citizens in Charge, an organization he founded. So call him a captain or a general. Admiral would be acceptable as well. Admiral. Yes. Call him an admiral.

WHAT BISC SAYS: “Jacob is also the director of Citizens in Charge, a group he uses to advocate for the expansion of ballot initiatives so he can take his ballot ideas to all 50 states.”

ANSWER: Yes, Citizens in Charge supports the initiative process—unlike BISC. Shouldn’t citizens in all 50 states have the ability to use voter initiatives to check the excesses of politicians? Why does BISC seek to undermine the initiative process? What are they afraid of? Maybe they can change their name to the Ballot Initiative Stopping Center.

WHAT BISC SAYS: “BISC has tracked Jacob’s ties to secretive organizations with deep pockets (such as Howie Rich-funded Americans for Limited Government) that prefer to operate outside of the public eye.”

ANSWER: Uh…”outside of the public eye”? Public organizations that publicly advocate publicly known causes are kind of in the public eye. There are even web sites and things that list contact information.

Over the years Paul Jacob himself has been all over the media talking about term limits, initiative rights, tax limits, eminent domain reform, why Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson should not be trying to throw him in prison for the “crime” of supporting an Oklahoma ballot initiative, and so forth. Paul has worked with a number of groups, including Americans for Limited Government. That certainly hasn’t been a secret. But we’re glad to know that BISC can read the newspaper. Keep reading all those secrets!

WHAT BISC SAYS: “In 2007 a multi-county grand jury in Oklahoma indicted Jacob and two others for their involvement in the 2005 petition drive to put the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) initiative on the ballot. They were charged with conspiracy to defraud voters by hiring out-of-state signature gatherers, against Oklahoma state laws.”

ANSWER: Darn these brazen involvements in petition drives anyway! What a blight on the body politic, much like democracy, constitutions, constitutionally protected democracy and petition rights….

Taking their cue from Oklahoma Attorney General Edmondson, BISC hides behind a grand-jury indictment that has been dismissed, only to be replaced by a direct indictment from the very political AG. The actual charge is conspiracy to defraud the state. Paul is innocent. But, for BISC, the question of whether he is innocent or guilty doesn’t even come up. Why not? Like Edmondson, do they regard the matter as irrelevant?

WHAT BISC SAYS: “As a result of the indictment, Jacob has launched a national tour to highlight the so-called legal threats to the ‘citizens’ initiative movement’ around the country. He is now traveling around the country testifying against common-sense signature gathering reforms, and claiming victimization at the hands of the Oklahoma attorney general.”

ANSWER: It’s been said that we’ve become a nation of victims. People too often assume the mantle of victimhood in response to all kinds of imagined wrongs. And now here we have Paul Jacob “claiming victimization” just because the Oklahoma Attorney General has targeted him and two other citizen activists in a politically-motivated prosecution that seeks to toss the Oklahoma Three in prison for years for the “crime” of aiding and abetting democracy in Oklahoma. Presumably, a more gentlemanly response to such thuggish conduct would be supine acquiescence.

The purpose of Paul’s tour is not just to defend himself against the politically-motivated prosecution, but also to counter the assault on the initiative process in state after state by left-wing democracy-bashers like BISC working with power-mad attorneys general and other politicians and special interests. All of whom despise the idea of citizens being in charge.

Most frustrating for BISC has been Paul’s success (though Paul says Tim Eyman and others deserve the credit) in stopping a Washington State bill that would have required people carrying a petition to be licensed and to show that license to anyone who asks them while they are petitioning. The license would have included personal information, making it easier to harass and intimidate petitioners. It is no coincidence that BISC specializes in training “blockers” who harass anyone circulating petitions for what BISC determines to be conservative ballot measures.

Luckily, the Washington State legislation was defeated. Of course, a similar law had been declared unconstitutional back in the 1990s, but BISC and anti-initiative politicians don’t concern themselves with such trivialities as the Constitution.

[to be continued]