In  a little ballyhooed public initiative, voters in North Dakota will  decide the fate of Measure 3 on Tuesday. Altogether there are 4  initiatives up for an up or down thumb from the electorate.

What  makes this othewise uneventful, run-of-the-mill election special is  that Measure 3 could have implications nationwide and have a rehash in  this year's presidential election.

Measure  3, a North Dakota ballot initiative set for Tuesday, would demand that  the government have a 'compelling interest' before it puts a 'burden' on  people following religious beliefs. Critics call it an answer to a  nonexistent problem.

By all  accounts, spring elections in North Dakota are usually sleepy affairs:  maybe a couple local ballot initiatives or a handful of city council or  school board races. Not this year, though.

Voters  across the state weigh in on four ballot initiatives on Tuesday. While  most of the radio chatter and letters to the editor have concerned a  property tax initiative or the question of changing the logo of the  University of North Dakota, it's the 83-word amendment known as Measure 3  that is turning into a flashpoint with national implications heading  into November elections.

North  Dakota's Measure 3 has galvanized religious groups, human service  organizations, and civil rights lawyers, turning the vote from a local  issue into a noteworthy skirmish in the larger national clash over  religion, the government, and civic life.

Called  the Religious Liberty Restoration amendment, the measure would add a  clause to the state constitution stipulating that the government must  have a “compelling interest” in order to “burden” a person whose actions  or decisions are informed by religious belief and that the government  should use the “least restrictive means to further that interest.”

Backers,  which include the Roman Catholic diocese and a coalition of  conservative groups in North Dakota, say the measure predates the  current fight that erupted earlier this year when the Obama  administration instituted new rules requiring most employers – including  religious charities, hospitals, and universities – to provide employees  cost-free access to reproductive health services. Conservative social  organizations and national Republican strategists have seized on those  rules as a way to rally opposition to President Obama’s reelection bid.

Tom  Freier, president of the North Dakota Family Alliance, says his group  first began crafting its language more than two years ago, partly in  response to 1990 US Supreme Court ruling that some groups viewed as an  infringement on some religious practices.

“It’s  like flood protection: Are you going to wait until the flood to get the  protection? There are situations, maybe they’re not as great as in some  other places, but they are needed and the time to do it is right now,”  he says.

Opponents, however,  which include Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and an array of local  social service organizations, have called the measure an attempt to  codify workplace discrimination on the basis of religion. The Forum of  Fargo-Moorhead newspaper termed the amendment, "an attempted  ecclesiastical mugging."

Tom  Fiebiger, a Fargo labor lawyer and former Democratic state senator,  says the measure is vague and poorly written, and could open the door,  for example, for an employer to fire an unmarried, pregnant woman,  should that be contrary to the employer’s moral or religious beliefs.  Doctor could refuse blood transfusions in an emergency room or a  pharmacist could refuse to prescribe life-saving HIV drugs to a gay man  if homosexuality were viewed as  objectionable, opponents say.

But  real evidence that this rural state of 600,000 has been sucked into the  swirl over religion and public life can be found in the amount of money  that has poured in in recent weeks. If the fight over a typical ballot  question costs at most $100,000, the Measure 3 campaign is running more  than seven times as much, according to filings with Secretary of State  office. “I don’t know if I’ve ever seen this amount of money put into a  measure,” Mr. Freier says.

The  result has been a crescendo of ads that have crowded television screens  and radio waves from Fargo to Bismarck in a way not seen in years. And  with President Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney already  sparring over issues like same-sex marriage and access to contraception,  the North Dakota vote will likely be a harbinger for a full-throated  election year argument about religion in public life.

http://csmonitor.com/USA/2012/0611/War-on-religion-North-Dakota-Measure-3-aims-to-strike-back

From  the Cornfield, could we see a preview in North Dakota tomorrow of a  similar argument played out between Democrats and Republicans as they  jostle for control of the White House?