The people’s initiative power has commenced its second century amidst strong public support and reformers’ continuing itch to tweak it.
The latest entry in the initiative improvement sweepstakes is from the Public Policy Institute of California, whose president, Mark Baldassare, has proposed several recommendations – in the name of voters – “to mend, not end, their direct democracy system.” Baldassare suggests:
- Integrating the Legislature into the initiative process by reviving the indirect initiative.
- Increasing disclosure of initiative funders.
- Re-engaging voters in the initiative process by re-upping initiatives for a vote after several years, and empowering citizens commissions to make ballot recommendations.
The ostensible reason for these reforms is that voters are weary of the number of initiatives appearing on the ballot, or that the initiative process has been captured by wealthy special interests, leaving behind the good of the larger public.
Baldassare’s approach is reminiscent of proposals made earlier this year by Senate leader Darrell Steinberg, who also urged reforms to exert legislative influence over initiatives and to permit the Legislature to place tax measures on the ballot with a majority vote.
While voters certainly have the right to complain about the number of ballot measures that confront them each election, the reality of the extent and nature of initiatives is somewhat different than elites might believe.
Over the past twenty years, voters have faced 214 ballot measures on 25 statewide elections.
The measures break down as follows:
- 84 were measures placed on the ballot by the Legislature, including 27 G.O. bonds.
- 121 were initiative measures placed on the ballot by the People.
- 9 were referenda of legislation placed on the ballot by the People.
This averages to about three legislative measures and five voter-qualified measures per election. (Of course, almost all of these measures were considered before the Legislature and Governor changed the law to require all initiatives to be on the November ballot.)
Ballot measures had the following passage rates:
- Overall, the passage rate was 52 percent.
- Nearly three-quarters of legislative measures were approved.
- Six of nine referenda were approved, which means only three legislative statutes were rejected.
- Just over one-third of ballot initiatives were approved, or an average of about 1.75 per election.
Without a doubt, voters are discerning about their ballot measures, especially those placed on the ballot by initiative.
Special interest domination is ultimately a matter of perception, but it is hard to conclude that any one set of interests is forcing public policy through the ballot box. The 44 successful measures range across the board. Depending on the year, voters may take the side of an issue that is a switch from a previous position.
Depending on your perspective, over the past twenty years voters have either sent mixed messages or exercised subtle discretion on public policy:
- Voters have raised taxes four times, rejected them eight times.
- Voters made it easier to pass a state budget and raise taxes for school bonds, but tightened the ability to raise hidden taxes and required local voter approval for tax increases.
- Voters have supported sweeping political reforms to break the hold of self-serving politicians and interest groups. They’ve also voted to spend billions in state funds on various education, health and environmental programs.
- Voters have increased criminal or civil penalties on law breakers a half-dozen times, but reduced penalties three times – sometimes on the same ballot.
- Voters have passed three measures to improve treatment of animals, and two measures restricting same sex marriage.
The simple and unambiguous quality of the voter initiative (and referendum) is that it embodies reform. It provides a check on the Legislature’s action or inaction. It dispatches gridlock and refocuses the policy agenda. Any change to the voters’ arsenal of recourse will have to demonstrate that it does not roll back the balance between popular and legislative powers.