Category: initiative, referendum, and recall

Categories
ideological culture initiative, referendum, and recall

Keeping Up with the Arabs

It’s open season on Middle East dictators — but I’m a little jealous. Greater freedom and democracy may be coming to Tunisia and Egypt and Bahrain, but what about us?

The last two decades Americans have asserted themselves, changing control of Congress several times as well as passing term limits and other reforms directly through numerous statewide citizen initiatives.

Have our elected representatives responded by facilitating such democratic participation? Not on your life!

This year, many state legislators came into session hell-bent on blocking the citizen check of initiative and referendum.

In Colorado, legislators have proposed a constitutional amendment making it harder to place initiatives on the ballot. It would also mandate a 60 percent supermajority vote to pass a constitutional amendment, allowing deep pocket special interests the power to defeat reforms popular enough to win 59.9 percent of the vote.

Last November, Oklahoma voters passed a constitutional amendment to make it a little easier for citizens to petition an issue onto the ballot. Now, just months later, state senators narrowly passed an amendment that would make the same process much more difficult.

Currently, Nevada citizens must gather signatures in each of the state’s three congressional districts to qualify a statewide ballot issue. Legislation is pending to increase this requirement from three petition drives to 42 separate petition drives — one for each of the 42 state legislative districts.

Thus our “representatives” seek to stop the people from representing themselves.

This is Common sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

A Fraudulent Anti-Fraud Bill

The theory behind Washington State’s Senate Bill 5297 — now worming its way through Olympia — seems to be that the people can’t be trusted to legislate, so the more hurdles thrown up at the initiative process, the better.

But the bill itself shows just the opposite, revealing its legislative supporters as careless, heedless of facts, and nastily bigoted towards some folk and against others.

The truth? Washington State has had only one known case of signature fraud. A Service Employees International Union official repeatedly just made up names and signatures.

She’s confessed and awaits sentencing.

So why add SB 5297’s reporting requirements for signature gatherers? To stop frauds such as this?

Well, no. SB 5297 exempts union petitioners!

Par for the course. Politicians in not a few of the 24 states that have statewide initiative rights try such things, all the while talking about the evils of fraud.

The facts? After surveying public records, Citizens in Charge Foundation reported, last year in “Is the ‘F-word’ Overused?”, that “cases of verified fraud or forgery are not pervasive in initiative or referendum petitions. Furthermore, many of the ‘reforms’ passed by state legislatures to address fraud have shown no positive results.”

Fortunately for Washingtonians, initiative activist Tim Eyman has bashed the bill and nearly every state newspaper, usually editorializing against Eyman, has instead lambasted the legislation. Citizens are rallying. Several legislators have stood against it, and taken away much of its teeth and claws.

Now it’s time to kill the beast.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Accountability folly initiative, referendum, and recall

A Modest Proposal for Madison

“Ninety percent of life is just showing up.”

Well, Woody, tell that to Democratic state senators in Wisconsin. Or, should I say, in Rockford, Illinois . . . hiding from the Wisconsin police.

They’re not wanted for any crime. Wisconsin state troopers would simply take them into custody and deliver them to their worksite: the state capitol in Madison.

Unemployment soars, and folks with cushy jobs go underground. I hate to be so boringly practical, but people should show up for work or let their employer(s) know that they are resigning. Not showing up is irresponsible. (Of course, these are politicians.)

And the whole biz is about responsibility. Wisconsin Democrats don’t want to vote on Republican Governor Scott Walker’s proposals to make government employees contribute 5.8 percent of their pay toward their lucrative pensions and 12.6 percent toward their medical insurance premiums, and to end collective bargaining for benefits and work rules, while keeping it for pay.

These are legitimate issues for the legislature. Democracy is about voting on them — even when you won’t win. But by lurking next door in the Land of Lincoln, Democrats can deny the quorum necessary for the legislature to do business.

Citizens have one immediate recourse: Recall.

Under Wisconsin law, no elected official can be recalled in their first year in office. But eight of the 14 shirking senators could be recalled right now. Were a mere two of them recalled, Republican senators would alone constitute a quorum.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall term limits

Voters Need Not Apply

Colorado politicians have hatched a scheme, Senate Concurrent Amendment 1, that may solve the awful problem of those pesky Colorado voters passing reforms like term limits and the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, the state’s quite effective spending cap.

SCR-1 solves the alleged problem of too many constitutional amendments by — you guessed it — enacting yet another constitutional amendment. As the Senate yesterday passed SCR-1, sending it to the House, Democratic Senator Linda Newell of Denver complained, “I am embarrassed to see how many changes are in our constitution.”

She should be. While most of the 16 amendments enacted in the last decade were proposed by legislators (ten, or 62.5 percent), the measure the snooty senator supports is designed to disrupt only the citizen initiative process.

SCR-1 prevents a majority of Colorado voters from passing amendments by requiring a 60 percent supermajority — that is, allowing a 40 percent minority to block any reform. This works great for big labor and big business interests who can spend big bucks running nasty 30-second TV ads to create enough doubt to hold an initiative one vote under 60 percent.

Worse yet, if SCR-1 passes, legislators would still be able to put term limits or the state’s spending limit on the ballot for repeal by a simple majority. An interesting principle: new reform requires a supermajority, but lower percentages may gut term limits or dump the Taxpayer Bill of Rights.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
general freedom initiative, referendum, and recall

Swiss Gun Control

In mid-February, Swiss voters rejected stricter gun controls.

No one knows how many guns the Swiss own. There’s no national registration system, yet the Swiss do not suffer a high crime rate, like America does.

But the country does have the highest gun suicide rate in Europe.

The stranger issue, though — and in contrast to most countries around the world — is the number of semi-automatic rifles belonging to the army that soldiers and ex-soldiers store at home. It’s part of the Swiss defense plan. The army can quickly rise up in case of an attack.

The gun control proposal would have required solders’ firearms to be locked up in armories. This, it was argued, was to help reduce suicide rates . . . though a few high-profile shootings also gave impetus to the gun control measure. During the debate much was made of the country’s long history of firearm expertise and unique military heritage.

The measure was defeated in 20 of Switzerland’s 26 cantons, with over 56 percent of voters rejecting it, nationwide.

Does the Swiss system seem strange?

It’s certainly different.

Switzerland still uses conscripts, while the U.S. rightly recruits an all-volunteer military. But their method of decentralized governance, borrowed more than 150 years ago from us and today far more decentralized than ours, is wise not only for the firepower of national defense, but for more bang for the buck in all areas of government.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets ideological culture initiative, referendum, and recall

The Real Reaganism

Last week Americans honored the late Ronald Reagan on the occasion of his 100th birthday. There was one man who certainly made a difference.

Reagan’s cumulative pressing of his core belief in freedom and free markets was more important than any single accomplishment — or mistake. His dogged commitment to the principles of freedom changed the course of history, even as Reagan, the politician, didn’t always live up to his lofty beliefs. As president, he ran up (then) record budget deficits and he flip-flopped on draft registration, for example.

Still, as much as President Reagan could fall short, his legacy grows sweeter over time, in part because of a second major idea. He believed that the common sense of the people was far more capable and worthy of trust in making the important decisions we face than are politicians left to their own devices.

That’s why Mr. Reagan took time from his 1980 campaign to send a letter to New Jersey activist Sam Perelli, who was lobbying his state’s legislators to establish a process where citizens could put issues on the ballot. “George Bush and I congratulate you on your efforts to attain, for the people of New Jersey, the right to initiative and referendum,” Reagan wrote. “We urge you to keep up your fight and we endorse your efforts.”

Mr. Reagan is remembered for his faith in freedom and in our democratic ability to defend that freedom.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
crime and punishment initiative, referendum, and recall nannyism too much government

Greenlighting Red Light Cameras?

Politicians seem to love what are called “red light cameras” — cameras that take pictures of cars that run red lights. And then ticket the registered owners.

Citizens? Not so much. I’ve reported how Tim Eyman — an activist who usually sets his sights on tax increases — orchestrated a citizen initiative petition campaign to get rid of the red light cameras in his town. There are many other such movements.

But those who habitually side with government don’t get it. They see the issue as the Washington Post editors see it, as “common sense. Police can’t be everywhere, and officers should not be diverted from high-crime areas to police every high-risk intersection.”

A new study from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety backs up this “common sense” with, uh, science. Sort of. The study’s method has been attacked pretty thoroughly.

More importantly, as Radley Balko notes, there are better alternate policies — more effective in saving lives at intersections, and far less creepy.

Like what? you ask. Well, bear with me. It’s hard to understand: Longer yellow lights.

Yes. Longer yellow lights save lives. What a shock. And yet it turns out that when politicians have red light cameras installed, they tend to decrease the time of the yellows — the very opposite policy.

For our safety?

No.

For their revenue.

People who “go into politics” show their true colors when they prefer to pump up surveillance state powers instead of enacting simple, decent reforms.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
general freedom initiative, referendum, and recall too much government

The Tree of Liberty

For years, Egyptians have called for greater democracy and constitutional limits — like term limits. Now newly appointed Egyptian Vice President Omar Suhleiman dangles the concession of term limits for the president, freedom for the press and an end to the three decades of emergency powers, the better to retain the keys to the nation’s executive washroom and the army. Or so he hopes.

Wisely, both pro-democratic and not-so-democratic opponents aren’t buying it. Opponents fear that such concessions will (if Mubarak or his chosen cronies remain in power) be pulled back later.

At a time more opportune for thuggery.

Still, how to get from a brutally repressive state to a free, constitutional democratic republic? Revolution is a clumsy, dangerous mode of political change.

Jefferson may have written something about “refreshing” the tree of liberty every generation with the blood of patriots, but most of us prefer more peaceful methods.

Lo and behold, they exist: Free elections. Here in America, voters have had the power to change party control of the U.S. Congress several times this decade. Hasn’t gotten us the reforms we want yet, but it’s better than in Egypt.

Plus, in half the states and most cities, citizens can check government and inject reform into the political system through the initiative, referendum and recall.

Egyptians are struggling to get democracy; Americans should use what we’ve got.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall local leaders

Will Vote for Work – $5

Richard Milhous Nixon once famously proclaimed, “I am not a crook.” He later became the only president to resign from office.

The recall of Omaha, Nebraska, Mayor Jim Suttle brings that famous quip to mind. Many of the mayor’s defenders argue he shouldn’t be recalled because he hasn’t broken any laws. At a debate last week, restaurateur Nicole Jesse, co-chair of the recall committee, explained, “Omahans deserve and expect more than just, ‘He’s not a criminal.’”

She charged that the mayor had “promised to lower property taxes,” but “he’s increased them twice. He told the Omaha Bar and Restaurant Association he would not impose a new tax. He turned around and did just that.”

Dave Nabity, head of Citizens for Omaha’s Future, says that the mayor’s character — or lack thereof — is the critical issue. He has criticized the mayor and his campaign organization for making false allegations of fraud against the recall effort (as I discussed weeks ago), and can now point to a newly launched police investigation into the mayor’s anti-recall group, Forward Omaha, for fraudulent activity. The group allegedly drove busloads of homeless people to the polls after paying them $5 for “training” for a possible future job.

Mayor Suttle originally argued that the group’s actions were totally innocent and appropriate, but quickly changed his tune, issuing a statement that read, “The Mayor does not support this or any other type of voter manipulation.”

The recall election is tomorrow.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

The Omaha Recall

A Wall Street Journal story on the campaign to recall the mayor of Omaha, Nebraska, quotes the head of the U.S. Conference of Mayors saying that recall petitions should be made more difficult because “the political climate is toxic.”

Toxic to whom, betrayed citizens or out-of-touch politicians?

You know whose side I’m on. I took three weeks off my regular duties to manage the recall’s petition drive.

Such efforts aren’t easy. We needed signatures equaling 35 percent of the vote for mayor. A group called “Omaha Forward” harassed our petitioners, regularly predicted our failure in the news media and hurled charges of fraud at us. When we turned in the necessary 37,000 signatures, certified by elections officials, the group filed a lawsuit to block the recall.

Just before Christmas, I traveled back to Omaha to testify at the trial over the petition. The mayor’s attorney called me “The Music Man,” an out-of-towner out to swindle good Nebraskans. But not one single signature verified by the county was invalidated. As the judge said in his decision, “Plaintiff introduced evidence to attack the credibility of certain circulators and a Paul Jacob, the coordinator for the paid circulators. . . . This Court found Paul Jacob credible and accepted his testimony as truthful.”

The recall of Omaha’s mayor is on the ballot, January 25. Whether he is removed from office or not, voters have demonstrated that they cannot be taken for granted. A lawful democratic process prevails.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.