California has the most inflexible
initiative process in the world – which is to say, our process is totally
divorced from the legislative process. This state makes it harder than most
states and countries to fix errors and negotiate compromises on initiatives
before an election. And California is the only place on the planet that does
not permit the legislative body to amend or change an initiative statute once
it’s passed, except by another vote of the people.
Nearly every legislative session
brings proposals to reform the initiative process. But these almost always are
really efforts to stop the process, or make it more even more costly than it
already is. And usually, the proposals are one-offs, a single change that may
make very little difference at all.
This month, Assemblyman Mike Gatto
of Los Angeles offered the most thoughtful approach to initiative reform I’ve
seen. Gatto, who seems to understand that changing something like this requires
a package of reforms, has introduced five constitutional amendments that fit
well together.
His five measures also have a very
clear focus: making the process more flexible and integrating it with the
legislative process.
One measure, ACA 6, essentially
requires initiatives to live within the budget, by requiring initiative
sponsors to identify and specify funding for any new program or mandate
authorized by their measure. Another, ACA 9, wisely demands that any initiative
that establishes a supermajority requirement – say a two-thirds vote for fees,
as Prop 26 did – must pass by the same supermajority.
A third measure, ACA 12, would
bring the legislature into the initiative process in a thoughtful and novel
way. Under the proposed constitutional amendment, the legislature would have
hold hearings on each ballot initiative that has the signatures to qualify for
the ballot. The legislature could also propose amendments to initiative
sponsors, which could be added to the measure (even after qualification)-an
important new bit of flexibility. If the proponents reject the amendments, a
description of the amendments would appear in the voter guide.
The most significant of the five
Gatto measures is probably ACA 10, which would allow the legislature to amend
most laws implemented by initiative – after the law has been in effect for four
years. That’s a thoughtful approach – it gives respect to the people who voted
in the law, while also recognizing the reality that even good laws need updates
and fixes.
The only
measure I have doubts about is ACA 11, which is the only one of the five that
would limit ballot access. Gatto suggests in a press release that there are too
many initiatives on the ballot. To limit the number of initiatives, he would
increase the signature gathering standard for qualifying an initiative statute
back to 8 percent of the number of votes in the most recent gubernatorial
election (where it was before the 1960s constitutional revision commission)
from 5 percent.
Two problems: 1. This change would
make it costlier to qualify measures. 2. It also might unintentionally
encourage a further proliferation of constitutional amendments, since 8 percent
is also the qualification standard for constitutional amendments. Why bother
with a statute if you could get your idea in the constitution for the same
price?
If there are to be limits on
initiatives, they should be focused on limiting constitutional amendments (at
least until there’s been some paring down of a constitution that is the second
longest in the country). And any increase in signature limits should be paired
with legislation that makes it easier and less costly to gather signatures – by
permitting Internet gathering and by opening up more public places to petition
circulators.
That said, this five-part package
raises the bar on initiative proposals. Initiative reform is not exactly a high
priority for the legislature (More than once I’ve heard Speaker John Perez
shoot down the whole idea of initiative reform as politically impossible). And
initiative reform would work best as part of a constitutional revision process
in which the initiative process could be fully integrated with the budget
process and the system of legislative elections.
All that said, Mike Gatto has made
a heck of a good start.