Liberals in CA vehemently dislike the CA initiative process. Indeed, they just tried to enact an effective ban on the process, but the bill was vetoed by Gov. Brown.
These mislabeled “progressives” dislike citizen-signed propositions, as such measures bypass the institution the Big Government advocates control throughout most of the state — elected officials. I doubt we’d be hearing the proposition bleating from them if such were not the case.
Moreover, the feigned concern about improprieties in signature gathering ignores the benefits of a full vetting of the prop once it is on the ballot — especially compared to our chaotic state legislative procedures.
I recommend an informative out-of-print book by the late State Senator H.L. Richardson — “What Makes You Think We Read the Bills?”
http://www.amazon.com/What-Makes-Think-Read-Bills/dp/0916054780
Most of us know that in the closing days of each legislative session, our intrepid CA elected leaders vote on literally hundreds of ever-changing bills — some even changed surreptitiously. NO ONE knows what is in all — or likely even most — of the bills.
Hearings are bypassed, or the bills voted on are quite different from the ones that went to the hearing months before. Seldom do the legislators hear a full debate by both sides. As the session deadline approaches, logrolling too often becomes the primary criteria for passing each other’s bills.
It’s not your high school civics class version of government. No-sir-re-bob!
Compare that unfixable legislative morass with the proposition process. Once a prop is ballot qualified, it cannot be amended. Each side gets to present their ballot argument — and that argument is sent to all the registered voters in the state.
Perhaps more important, we voters quickly can see (often just by the signers of the arguments) which groups are on which side — a wonderful shorthand way of making an informed decision as to how to vote. And we have months to make our decisions.
Yes, the proposition system is awful. Capricious voters making sometimes ill-informed decisions.
But, as Henny Youngman responded when asked — “How’s your wife?” — COMPARED TO WHAT?
Bad as the initiative process is, the legislative process is worse. The real world of capitol shenanigans trumps the idealized stereotype of wise officials judiciously deciding our fate.
BTW, one control we still need — a super-majority to pass ANY law. And probably higher than 2/3 majority. I doubt we’d miss most of the failed legislation — or propositions. But that’s just my super-minority opinion — no need to seriously consider my idea.
Comments 7
I still have my paperback copy of Bill Richardson’s
book, “Slightly to the Right”, which is full of advice for
political activists, and candidates. It is still very
relevant.
For younger readers, Bill Richrdson was the
conservative conscience of the State Senate
in ther 1970s and 1980s, and also a GOP
nominee for US Senate against Alan Cranston.
He was intense but also witty.
Richard,
How about this: Instead of requiring a super-majority to pass any law, how about we require one law (or more) to be taken off of the books for every law passed?
According to the Secretary of State website, the CA initiative process was adopted on October 10, 1911 in a special election called by then Governor Hiram Johnson.
Hiram Johnson was no conservative, and it’s fascinating that today’s “progressives” are disgruntled with the system that their predecessors created.
Maybe it’s because unlike in pre-1911 California, the current liberal progressives have what appears to be a virtually permanent stranglehold on the reins of power in the state and they don’t like that “we the people” can circumvent them using the initiative process to effect “Direct Democracy”.
Councilman Stocks is right on the money about both 1911 and 2011.
California was only the 2nd state in the U.S.A. to add the companion process for ‘Recall’ elections, also on that same day in 1911…. our neighbors in Oregon got there first. The West was a real hotbed of Reform and direct democracy in the Progressive era. At the time, people like ex-President Teddy Roosevelt were the leading ‘Progressives’.
Gov. Hiram Johnson wanted to reduce the influence of the railroads in the State Capitol. This was one way to do it. And Councilman Stocks is also right that the current group with major power in Sacto fears ‘ too
much democracy’.
“Democracy never lasts very long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide.” – John Adams
Another part of how “the left” turned California into a Democracy is starting to redraw state senate districts by population in the late 60’s. In effect…making no difference between the assembly and the state senate. They destroyed the rural (usually more conservative) voice of CA and placed all the political power in LA and San Francisco.
Author
Alger, we’ve finally found some common ground! Of course, that assumes we need the new laws in the first place — an iffy proposition (so to speak). But putting that cautionary note aside, we have thousands of state laws that can be repealed with little harm to anyone outside government employment.
My general approach would be a 2/3 or more to pass a law, simple majority to repeal a law, with certain exceptions (legislature should not have easy time repealing citizen passed laws).
Richard,
I will mark this day in my calendar.