Tag: California

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

Blackmail and Ballots

Councilman Rick Roelle in Apple Valley, California, says that Wal-Mart “blackmailed the town.”

Blackmail is no small matter. So, what did Wal-Mart do, specifically?

Wal-Mart worked with citizens of Apple Valley, including supplying money, to gather enough petition signatures to place a measure on the local ballot for voters to decide whether Wal-Mart could build a store.

“The initiative process was an opportunity that allowed voters to voice their support for the benefits that Wal-Mart would bring their community,” a spokesperson for Wal-Mart argued, “including jobs, affordable groceries, increased tax revenue, and infrastructure improvements.”

Who’s right?

Aside from the fact that there are many issues the majority has no right to decide, including whether a law-abiding business can open its doors, why not let the people decide? At least a vote of the people is a clearer expression of the public will than a city council decision.

Some complain that even when a local petition qualifies the voters often don’t get a vote. Under state law, if 15 percent of the electorate signs a petition, the matter must be placed on a special election ballot . . . unless the city council enacts it, instead.

Special elections cost big money. Cash-strapped city councils have voted to allow Wal-Mart development, simply (they say) to save the expense of holding an election.

But such “caving in” doesn’t seem like blackmail in light of Menifee’s experience. The Wal-Mart measure there won with 76 percent of the vote.

Unless, like some politicians, you think doing the electorate’s will is “blackmail.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

Winners and Losers

California’s initiative process gets blamed for every political problem the state confronts . . . that is, by many legislators and political insiders.

Two measures receive the bulk of the ire: Proposition 13 and Proposition 98.

Liberals bemoan Prop 13’s requirement of a two-thirds legislative vote to raise taxes, preventing state government from getting “the proper revenues.” They are welcome to their opinion.

But 33 years ago, Californians passed the measure 65 to 35 percent. Last week, a Field Poll showed it just as popular today. Additionally, the pollsters reported, “In each of four previous Field Poll surveys conducted since its passage, Prop. 13 has been backed by Californians by double-digit margins.”

Conservatives oppose Prop 98, which passed very narrowly in 1988. It creates a floor for K-12 education spending of roughly 40 percent of the state budget.

That’s why some charge that initiatives dictate too much of the budget. But, were legislators otherwise planning to zero-out public school funding? I doubt it. Spending was around 40 percent before Prop 98.

One other thing: Prop 98 incorporated a provision allowing the legislature to suspend the 40 percent mandate. The legislature has done so twice.

I would have voted against it, but unless Californians who oppose 98 can put a repeal onto the ballot and convince the majority of their fellow voters to agree, well, they’ll have to live with it.

At least, until the next election.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ideological culture initiative, referendum, and recall

The Public Square

Californians’ initiative, referendum and recall process is as hot a topic for debate as ever. That’s apt, for this year marks the process’s 100th anniversary.

On October 10, 1911, Californians went to the polls to enact these democratic checks on government after Governor Hiram Johnson persuaded legislators to put them on the ballot. On October 10, 2011, I’ll be in Sacramento at an event sponsored by Citizens in Charge Foundation to celebrate the centennial.

And a few days ago, I served on a panel of interesting people in front of a great audience of Californians at a Zócalo Public Square event in San Francisco, entitled, “How Do We Put the People Back in the Initiative Process?”

My answer: Make it easier, instead of harder, to put issues on the ballot. Presently, California requires 800,000 voters to sign petitions to put an amendment on the ballot and 400,000 voters for a statutory measure; sponsors have only five months to get all those signatures.

Why not give citizens a year to collect signatures? Why not lower the requirement?

Unless “reform” of the initiative is really code for not putting the people back in the process, of course. Some folks don’t think voters are up to the task of democratic decision-making — at least, whenever voters don’t decide their way.

Let’s agree that the people aren’t perfect. I still prefer citizen control over government to the alternative of rule by politicians and self-appointed elites.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

Golden State Standards

In their just completed session, California legislators expressed deep concern about transparency, democracy and good government.

Sen. Mark DeSaulnier authored Senate Bill 448 to mandate “a little transparency” in the initiative petition process. The legislation would have forced citizens paid to circulate petitions to wear a sign on their chests reading: “Paid Signature Gatherer.”

But Governor Jerry Brown vetoed the bill, stating, “I choose not to go down this slippery slope where the state decides what citizens must wear when petitioning their government.”

On the very last day of the session, Sen. Loni Hancock became concerned about democracy. “Low turnout elections do not represent the needs, priorities and desires of the larger electorate,” she decried.

So she stuffed new wording into one of her languishing bills, SB 202, to force all citizen initiatives to the November ballot. (Measures referred by legislators would, under SB 202, continue to go onto any ballot legislators desire.) In less than 24 hours, the bill was introduced, hearings were announced and held only minutes later, and the bill was rammed through both chambers.

Sen. Hancock pronounced this “good government.”

Legislators shouldn’t “gerrymander” which election citizen-initiated measures are voted upon for their own political purposes and those of their preferred special interests — in this case, public employee unions. Nor should new legislation be introduced and passed in a single day, without the public having time to communicate with their representatives.

That’s not transparency. It’s not democracy. And it’s not good government.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

We Can All Get Along

Our country is divided politically — or so we hear — right from left, liberal from conservative, progressive from libertarian. Nothing new.

Yet, don’t we all agree on the main points? Certain truths remain self-evident:

  • Government must have the consent of the governed.
  • ‘We, the People’ are the boss.
  • Our votes should count.
  • Our constitutional rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness count even more.

At Townhall last Sunday, I wrote about a government (ours) that lacks the approval of the people. Even cynical moi is amazed that, in response to their sizzling disapproval ratings, our politicians seem intent on attacking our most fundamental democratic rights to actively disapprove. Freedom of Speech. Assembly. Petition.

On the first day of this month, California Governor Jerry Brown vetoed a bill he called a “dramatic” assault on the initiative rights of Californians. On the last day, another bill rests on the governor’s desk. It would force petition circulators to wear a sign on their chests, reading, “Paid Signature Gatherer,” if they receive any compensation at all for their work.

This “reform” is the zenith of wisdom among the Golden State’s great solons.

Our country’s problems with representative government cannot be solved by legislating away the rights of citizens to speak out and participate politically. And by “representative government” we mean not only that the job of a legislator is to represent us, but also that we reserve the right to represent ourselves.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

Voters Ruin Everything

William Endicott, former deputy managing editor of The Sacramento Bee, thinks the problem with California legislators is their “Let the people decide” attitude. In a recent op-ed, Mr. Endicott argued that the initiative process allows politicians to shirk their responsibilities, to let decisions be made by voters at the ballot box.

It’s an awfully convoluted notion: to make legislators actually do their jobs, citizens must back away and give those known to shirk their responsibilities a monopoly on legislative power.

Funny, in Congress and in the 26 states where voters lack the initiative, politicians happen to be shirking their responsibilities like it’s going out of style. There’s just not as much voters can do about it.

But Endicott’s argument doesn’t really concern legislators at all. It is about the voters of California, who have (to paraphrase him) ruined everything.

He writes: “Outcomes too often have been decided not by reasoned debate but by emotional appeals, mind-numbing and misleading television commercials and direct mail, all of which do more to confuse than to enlighten.”

So Endicott looks for legislators to “crack down on signature gatherers” and “make it more difficult to qualify a measure.”

In other words, democracy was swell, but that new-fangled TV is too much for gullible voters. Let’s hit the kill switch on direct democracy and put all our hope in our brainy, courageous legislators.

In other words, Californians: Shut up and pay your taxes.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

Punishing Productivity

California Governor Jerry Brown just vetoed Senate Bill 168, writing, “It doesn’t seem very practical to me to create a system that makes productivity goals a crime.”

Senate Bill 168 makes it illegal to pay someone circulating an issue petition based either directly or indirectly on the number of signatures gathered. In fact, had Brown signed SB 168 into law, you’d get thrown in jail for awarding a prize, say a campaign t-shirt, to the volunteer who gathers the most signatures.

Petition campaigns like productivity. They don’t want folks locked up for it.

Could undercutting productivity and doubling the cost of petitioning be the real goal of SB 168?

Perhaps outlawing incentives isn’t intended to slow the pace and super-size the cost of a petition drive. But it does. Californians have only 150 days to gather hundreds of thousands of voter signatures, so a slowdown and added cost means issues blocked from reaching the voters.

In a Sacramento Bee op-ed, Sen. Ellen Corbett, SB 168’s author, addressed concerns about diminished democracy, writing, “[I]n states that have enacted a similar law there has been no change in the number of initiatives qualifying for the ballot.”

But a review of those states shows a change — for the worse. Oregon saw a roughly 50 percent reduction in initiatives. In Montana and North and South Dakota the number of citizen measures dropped. After passage of productivity bans in Nebraska and Wyoming, neither state’s voters have seen another initiative on their ballot.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
term limits

How Not to Fix a Failed State

“As long as unions and business buy our politicians and take every advantage for themselves . . .” writes Ron Kaye at Fox and Hounds Daily, “California will keep declining.”

Mr. Kaye notes a rare agreement between business and union lobbies, which have united “to pour millions into a ballot measure next June to sell us on the idea that giving legislators 14 years in the house of their choice is better than making them serve eight years in the Senate and six in the Assembly.”

Kaye has the figure wrong: It’s twelve years in either body. Though billed as a tightened term limit, down from the 14 years now theoretically possible (by switching houses) to the proposed dozen, few politicians are able to manage such switches, so in actuality the limit would be weakened, from a tight six or eight to twelve.

This, Kaye argues, would make it easier for special interests to buy instead of rent politicians. The measure is “just another political charade.”

But I think Kaye errs by going on to say that today’s leadership failure “can’t be fixed by law.”

California suffers from a political infrastructure problem far worse than any other state: too small a ratio between politicians and citizens, insulating representatives in huge districts.

While no fix is guaranteed, the state could use more representatives, not fewer.

And that’s a constitutional fix. Added to existing term limits, it might help nudge California government out of its current (and disastrous) rut.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

Creating a New Crime

California is wild and crazy, fruity and nutty. Not in Hollywood, but in Sacramento.

The state’s enormous prison population — so large that the Feds recently ordered California to release overcrowded prisoners — feeds an otherwise expensive prison system, straining the state’s strapped budget.

So what did Golden State solons go and do?

They created a new crime.

Almost. Senate Bill 168 has passed both houses of the state’s General Assembly and sits on Governor Jerry Brown’s desk.

The bill would make it “a misdemeanor for a person to pay or to receive money or any other thing of value based on the number of signatures obtained on a state or local initiative, referendum, or recall petition. . . .”

The penalties are up to a year in jail or a $25,000 fine or both.

What is the compelling reason to criminalize paying people for being productive and gathering more signatures, rather than less?

Fraud. Or so supporters say.

But instances of fraud on initiative petitions in California have dropped a whopping 78 percent over the last decade. Moreover, there’s no evidence that paying people on the number of signatures they gather induces fraud.

The Sacramento Bee urged Governor Brown to veto SB-168 and prevent it from “raising the cost of qualifying measures, freezing out less wealthy groups, and making direct democracy more of a captive of well-heeled interest groups.”

If you live in California, call the Governor’s office at (916) 445-2841 and respectfully ask him to veto SB 168.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ideological culture initiative, referendum, and recall

What’s Next, Democracy?

Not all votes are democratic, for — as Stalin pointed out — it’s not who votes that counts, but who counts the votes.

Same for “town halls” and public discussions: Politicians regularly hold meetings with constituents the main point of which is to make sure that nothing too challenging gets aired.

This being the case, you might guess my reservations about “deliberative polling” in the “What’s Next California” vein.

This weekend three hundred “randomly selected” Californians gathered in Torrance to undergo what looks to be a three-part process:

  1. Submit to polling on the major issues facing the crisis-ridden state.
  2. Gather to discuss the issues, with fact-sheets in hand, and lecturers to listen to and answer questions.
  3. Submit to polling at the end of the session, to see how many of the participants’ ideas have changed.

Project founder James Fishkin is obviously interested in the initiative process, but just as obviously interested in seeing it lean more towards a “progressive” direction. Of the three opinions on the program featured at Zócalo Public Square, I lean towards Tim Cavanaugh’s: “By combining polling with top-down instruction from a panel of ‘experts,’ deliberative pollsters hope to determine how voting would change if voters’ opinions could be forced into compliance with establishmentarian thinking. . . .”

Athenian-style public deliberation? Not really. The experts aren’t polled, so it’s obvious that they aren’t expected to modify their opinions.

Besides, in a real democracy, the people would do their own research and bring along their own experts.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.