Propositions and referenda are meant to empower citizens and
keep government accountable to the people. But they can also wreak
havoc with the legislative process, and lock the state into
damaging commitments.
Ballot initiatives are easily manipulated by special interests
and can create disruptive and unpredictable effects that impact the
state far into the future.
They make their way onto the ballot either by a vote of the
state Legislature or by a collection of signatures, and passed with
between a 50 or 66 percent vote of the people, depending on their
exact provisions.
But finding complete and accurate information about the impact
of a proposition can be next to impossible. Even the official voter
guide states that the pro and con arguments “have not been
checked for accuracy by any official agency.”
Reading the text of the law itself is usually futile, unless
maybe you are a lawyer.
Just about the only place to get good information are the few
pages of information put out by the Legislative Analyst.
But instead of winners being chosen based on hard facts and
carefully founded opinions, it seems that the competition often
comes down to whichever side spends more money on scary TV ads.
Some of the worst laws in California’s history came to
pass as propositions.
Shortsighted and inhumane, Proposition 187 banned illegal
immigrants from receiving public education and many health
benefits. Its discriminatory provisions were so extreme that it was
eventually struck down in federal court.
Proposition 13 locked in property taxes for millions of
landowners, but it also dramatically slashed government revenues
and gutted the state’s education budget.
And Proposition 209 banned affirmative action from all state
institutions, dramatically reducing the enrollment of minority
students in the higher education system.
Besides being wrought with unintended consequences, many of the
16 propositions on next Tuesday’s California ballot would
create more problems than they would solve. Eight of them are
constitutional amendments, which are difficult to pass but even
more difficult to repeal.
At a law school event earlier this month debating pros and cons
of one proposition, State Senator Joe Dunn (D-Garden Grove), told a
Bruin reporter the initiative process is “out of
control.”
California has evolved a great deal since the early 1900s, when
then-Gov. Hiram Johnson pushed reforms allowing voter initiatives.
The belief is noble, but is also unrealistic.
Los Angeles and San Francisco are no longer outposts in the Wild
West, and California is as large and complicated as a mid-sized
country. It is time to govern it as such.
The founders of the United States realized a large and diverse
nation would need a republican form of government. California
should accept this reality and reconsider its use of the
proposition system.
Despite the irony, creating a ballot proposition to reform
ballot propositions may be the best solution. If the state is to
ever move away from knee-jerk, deceitful propositions, voters must
take the initiative.