Category: initiative, referendum, and recall

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall insider corruption term limits

Mass Corruption

Ah, these United States — which is most corrupt?

New Jersey’s a traditional favorite. Chris Christie, the Republican candidate for governor this year, built his reputation as a federal prosecutor convicting 130 state and local politicians of corruption.

But Illinois is a contender: Think ousted Governor Rod Blagojevich.

Now, make room for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 

Recently, former House Speaker Sal DiMasi was indicted — along with several associates — for allegedly helping a software company obtain $20 million in state contracts in return for lots of cold, hard cash.

The previous speaker left office just before he was indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice. The speaker before that had been pushed out after pleading guilty to federal income tax evasion.

This rather consistent level of corruption is a sign of too much power and not enough accountability. Frank Hynes, a Democrat who served in the legislature for 26 years, agrees. He says, “The speaker controls, basically, everything — where you sit, where you stand, how many aides you get, whether you get a good parking space.”

Obviously the Bay State needs term limits — DiMasi had been in office for 30 years. But years ago legislators blocked a term limits amendment just as they’ve blocked all but three citizen petitions for constitutional amendments during the last 90 years.

Massachusetts needs a new revolution, one that puts citizens in charge with an initiative process that politicians cannot ignore.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ballot access initiative, referendum, and recall

Oregon’s $10,000 Innocent-​Bystander Fine

In Oregon, it is now a crime to be both an innocent bystander and a leading participant in democracy. 

Or it soon will be, if Oregon’s Governor Kulongoski signs a bill that has just emerged from the state legislature. The bilious bill would fine leaders of a citizen initiative campaign $10,000 if anybody working for the campaign is found to have committed fraud in the process of gathering signatures.

The alleged wrongdoing is not being complicit in fraud but “failing to prevent” it. Do you see the problem? No screening process, no matter how careful, can eliminate the free will of campaign workers. A chief petitioner on a campaign cannot be everywhere watching everyone as more than a hundred thousand people sign the petition. Under this law, an opponent could bankrupt the  leader of a ballot measure by joining the effort and committing fraudulent acts.

This and other less zany — but still burdensome — provisions are designed, presumably, to “cut down on fraud and abuse.” Tough job for a bill that is itself inherently fraudulent and abusive. 

It’s real purpose, of course, is to hamper and obstruct the petition process.

The only Senate Democrat to vote no to the bill, state Senator Vicki Walker, notes that some activists will be more reluctant now to be lead a ballot initiative if they can be socked with a huge fine for a violation committed by somebody else.

Well, that’s obvious. It’s also, sadly, the point.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall too much government

The Color of Contempt

The good sense that California voters exhibited at the polls in May has been rewarded with continual attack and derision. 

Meg Whitman, former eBay CEO and Republican candidate for governor, recently said, “In many ways, the proposition process has worn out its usefulness.”

She’s criticizing the initiative, and she’s not alone.

Wrong target. California’s initiative process account for what little political sanity exists in the state. 

The problem is spendaholic politicians.

But politicians and pundits continue bashing California’s ballot initiative process. Anything to deflect attention away from the inability of politicians to prioritize.

Even The Economist has taken up the bludgeon. A recent story, headlined “The ungovernable state,” said of the voter initiative process:

At first, it made sense .… The state in 1910 had only 2.4 million residents, and 95 percent of them were white. (Today it has about 37 million residents, and less than half are white.) A small, homogenous and informed electorate was to make sparing and disciplined use of the ballot to keep the legislature honest, rather as in Switzerland.

Is The Economist actually suggesting that a multi-​ethnic electorate is incapable of democratic decision-​making? I think we are witnessing the insider class move from condescending disdain for the people to a full-​blown case of dementia.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall tax policy too much government

Prop 13 Declared Innocent

You hear it all the time: California’s in such a mess “because of Proposition 13.”

You probably wonder how that initiative, passed way back in the ‘70s, could be so key.

Well, it was the first of a long line of voter-​instigated tax limitation measures, and it made politicians ache with frustration. Politicians LIKE spending money; Proposition 13 limited, somewhat, their greedy quest for ever more money to spend.

But did it really unbalance California fiscal policy?

Chris Reed, writing in the San Diego Union-​Tribune, explains how nutty this charge really is:

[S]ince shortly after Prop. 13’s adoption, property tax revenue increased by 579 percent. That is not a typo. It went up 579 percent.

During the same span, population went from 24 million to 38 million — an increase of 58 percent.

Reed checked his numbers against the inflation rate, and found that “property tax revenue has increased by more than triple the combined rate of inflation and population growth.”

He did a little more checking and learned that property tax revenues went up faster than any other major revenue source!

So Prop 13 simply cannot be the reason for California’s impending bankruptcy. Though the measure limited tax rate growth, and helped homeowners, it did not unbalance the budgets. 

Humungous increases in spending did. Politicians need look no further than their own projects.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

A Law to Be Named Later

Nevada’s legislators have long desired to do something that they haven’t been able to do. 

I understand. It happens in baseball. Two teams want to trade a player, but can’t decide who to trade for that player. So, one team hands over, say, their left-​fielder for “a player to be named later” from the other team.

These deals require tremendous trust.

I wonder how much the people of Nevada trust their state legislature. 

I wonder because what their legislators want is to make the ballot initiative process much, much harder to use.

Years ago, the federal courts struck down a requirement that petition signatures be gathered in three-​fourths of Nevada’s counties. So the state legislature passed a new law requiring signatures from every county. 

Yes, the court struck that law down, too.

Nevada solons came back with legislation mandating that petitions be gathered in each of 42 legislative districts. This makes a petition drive actually 42 drives — greatly increasing costs and the opportunity for error. 

Worried that scheme wouldn’t pass court review, legislators amended the bill to require petitions to come from every U.S. congressional district. But only for this election cycle. There’s a kicker: By 2011, legislators will create “petition districts.” How many districts? They’ll decide later … as many as they determine can get away with.

The bill passed in the last days of the just-​completed session. It’s sort of a policy to be named later. 

Unlike that bill, this is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall too much government

Big Brother Plays in Traffic

One of my favorite uncles used to jokingly tell us kids to “go play in traffic.” In reality, not so good for kids. Or for politicians.

Maryland’s recent Senate Bill-​277 brought this to mind. It authorizes the installation of cameras to monitor and ticket for speeding near highway work zones and schools. Legislators insist that the cameras will slow down traffic and bring in needed revenue.

How do voters feel? Well, according to a report at TheNewspaper​.com “no photo enforcement program has ever survived a public vote.”

Voters tend to regard speed cameras as simply another scam to grab yet more money. The cameras also remind one of Big Brother.

So, how come legislators don’t listen to the people? Maybe one reason is that as TheNewspaper​.com also reports, “[P]arties with a direct financial interest in automated ticketing showered members of the Maryland General Assembly and the governor with $707,725 in gifts and campaign cash.”

Oh.

Fortunately, Maryland voters have the right to referendum: They can petition to place this legislation to a vote of the people. 

And that is exactly what the group Maryland for Responsible Enforcement is now doing.

Similar battles are being waged in other states. There’s an effort to take away the 200 speed cameras now on Arizona roads; Montana legislators just banned such cameras in Big Sky Country.

Maybe Big Brother should “go play in traffic.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.