02/05/06 State a test site' for referendums on the war; Growing wave of local votes has drawn interest

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Milwaukee, Wis.: Feb 5, 2006 pg. B.1

A growing movement of local referendums on the Iraq war is making a name for Wisconsin in a way that proponents see as an achievement, but critics regard as an embarrassment.

Depending on the outcome of referendums scheduled so far in 21 communities, including Milwaukee, anti-war activists in other states might follow Wisconsin's lead in using the ballot box to gauge opposition to the war.

"We're looking at Wisconsin, in some ways, as kind of a test site," said Scott McLarty, spokesman at the Green Party's national headquarters in Washington, D.C.

The outside attention raises the stakes in referendum campaigns that otherwise are intended only to send a symbolic message about whether Wisconsin voters think U.S. troops should withdraw from Iraq.

In addition to Milwaukee, the question will appear on ballots this April or November in Madison, Whitefish Bay, La Crosse and several smaller communities.

Some critics of the anti-war effort are preparing to get into the trenches and campaign vigorously against the ballot measures.

"We're going to turn it into a positive," said Chris Muller, chairman of the La Crosse County Republican Party, whose leadership sees the referendum as an attempt to put partisan politics above national security in the U.S. war on terrorism.

"We want to send a very strong message to the troops," Muller said.

Although the referendum idea was borrowed from Vermont after anti- war proposals were passed at town hall meetings there, Wisconsin is believed to be the only state where activists in significant numbers have gained access to the ballot box.

"I think it's kind of embarrassing, quite honestly," said Rick Wiley, executive director of the Wisconsin Republican Party.

Under state law, any referendum question can be brought before voters in a city or village through a petition signed by 15% of the number of voters who turned out locally in the most recent election for governor.

A common council or village board also can vote to place a question on the ballot, which is what happened in Milwaukee after activists there fell short of the 21,000 signatures they needed to collect.

In some communities where enough signatures have been collected, local officials have injected themselves into the situation anyway, in some cases leading to debates about whether the petitioners are truly seeking democracy or division.

In Watertown, aldermen have refused to put the measure on the ballot and now are being challenged in court.

Still, new petition drives are being contemplated in other cities or villages by activists hoping to get on the ballot in November, when Milwaukee's proposal will appear.

A group in Glendale, for example, plans to start circulating petitions this spring.

"Let the people have a voice," said Glendale petition organizer Gigi Pomerantz, a nurse practitioner. "I think it's very patriotic."

Win or lose, war protesters say they are happy that Wisconsin communities are giving residents a chance to sound off and showing other states a new method of registering support or opposition to the war.

Steve Burns, coordinator of the Wisconsin Network for Peace and Justice, said that although he expects some referendums to fail, he does not view that as a loss.

"We're leading the country," Burns said. "Whatever the results, we've accomplished something if we give people the right to vote."

Even some who oppose the idea of pulling out of Iraq are upbeat about the idea of putting the issue up to a popular vote.

William West, a leader of the Wisconsin American Legion, which represents 74,000 veterans, said that as long as the anti-war crowd does not resort to criticizing U.S. soldiers, he has no objection to people casting ballots.

"That's part of free speech," West said. "It's every citizen's right."

The Shorewood Village Board is scheduled to decide Monday whether to allow an April referendum, after petitioners were required to rewrite their proposal in the form of an affirmative statement rather than a question a technicality that has been raised elsewhere, too.

In Watertown, aldermen have refused to put the issue on the ballot, even though petitioners corrected the wording on their request and the city clerk has validated the 980 signatures that were collected.

By a narrow 5-4 margin, the Common Council voted to deny the request on the grounds that U.S. foreign policy in Iraq is not a suitable question for a local referendum.

Members of the Watertown Peace & Democracy Coalition responded by filing suit against the city, with a hearing scheduled for Tuesday before a judge in Jefferson County Circuit Court.

Watertown Mayor John David said the dispute has split the community, because many war veterans and other residents believe a referendum would be disrespectful toward U.S. soldiers fighting in Iraq.

"It's really a gut-wrenching issue in this community," he said.

If the anti-war referendum is allowed, David added, some city leaders also fear that future ballots will be cluttered with frivolous ideas.

To which a local activist responds: What would be the harm?

Penny Eiler, a member of the Peace & Democracy Coalition, said the war referendum proposal has fueled a healthy debate around town. And she believes other ballot measures would get people equally engaged in issues that interest them.

"It would be democracy breaking out all over," she said. "Would this be a problem?"