Seriously: my free-speech in malls referendum won 8,334 to 2,884 in Urbana. Referenda calling for overturning Citizens United also won easily in both Urbana and Champaign. Here's the official results:
Advisory: Citizens v. Corporations CITY OF CHAMPAIGN
TOWNSHIP
Vote For Up To 1
(WITH 39 OF 39 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
YES . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,409 72.10
NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,737 27.90
Total . . . . . . . . . 24,146
Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 18
Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 3,566
Free Political Speech CUNNINGHAM TOWNSHIP
Vote For Up To 1
(WITH 23 OF 23 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
YES . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,334 74.29
NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,884 25.71
Total . . . . . . . . . 11,218
Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 4
Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 2,032
Money Is Not Speech CUNNINGHAM TOWNSHIP
Vote For Up To 1
(WITH 23 OF 23 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
YES . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,211 71.71
NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,239 28.29
Total . . . . . . . . . 11,450
Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 7
Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 1,797
The local Occupy group got these on the ballots. There was no subsequent campaigning, people just voted as they decided upon reading them.
The texts of the referenda follow the squiggle.
Advisory Non-Binding Question:
Privately Owned Public Spaces
"Shall the City of Urbana establish by ordinance that privately owned public
spaces respect the right of polite, non-disruptive free political speech?"
"Whereas expensive media campaigns have recently largely replaced ordinary
political conversations between citizens, and, whereas much of the public space in
which such conversations used to take place has been replaced with private
malls, and, whereas since 1980 the state of California has successfully required
that polite non-disruptive political speech be allowed at certain privately owned
public spaces such as malls and parking lots. We request that the City of Urbana
establish by ordinance that such privately owned public spaces respect the right of
polite, non-disruptive free political speech."
Advisory Non-Binding Question:
Amendment To The United States Constitution
"Shall the City of Urbana have the authority to propose an amendment to
the United States Constitution to establish: "1) that a corporation does not
have the same rights as an actual person, and 2) that money is not speech
and, therefore, regulating political spending is not equivalent to limiting
political speech?"
"The U.S. Supreme Court held, in "Citizens United v. FEC", that
corporations have the rights of real human citizens and are entitled to spend
unlimited amounts of money in support of political campaigns. To undue that
decision, the people of the Cunningham Township support an Amendment to theUnited States Constitution to establish that: 1) A corporation does not have the
same rights as an actual person, and 2) Money is not speech and, therefore, regulating political spending is not equivalent to limiting political speech. We further request that our city, state and federal representatives enact resolutions and legislation to advance the two positions proposed as part of the Amendment, with reference to the need
for an Amendment.