Well, the Legislature is back in session, just in time for another exposee of California governance, or lack thereof. This time, it is the Economist magazine’s monthly headline. So, yay!
While the Economist looks at everything from an economic perspective first (uh…right…the title), they aren’t necessarily dogmatic. Rather than simply joining the chorus of “man, California really sucks, their leaders are terrible,” they actually look for the root of the problem. In their opening story of the section, they point the finger chiefly at the initiative system.
This special report has shown how one of the three ingredients of direct democracy, the initiative process, has, cumulatively over the past three decades, caused much of the dysfunction that paralyses California whenever it suffers an economic shock, as it is doing at present. Does it follow that California must get rid of the initiative process?
It is a moot question because Californian voters would never agree (in what itself would have to be an initiative) to end initiatives. Ronald George, California’s former chief justice, says that “people will never vote to give up their own power.” The best we can hope for is to make the process “less extreme”. (The Economist)
The entire series takes a serious look at where we are, how we get there, and how we get out of this situation. Particularly, how we harness the power of direct democracy in a state of nearly 40 million people. This is no easy question, and while it is easy to be glib, it is harder to get to real solutions.
They do suggest some particular reforms, from emphasizing referenda over initiatives, to requiring a sunset of all initiative legislation. These are all solid ideas, and I think you could get a majority of Californians to agree to many of them. However, getting them on the ballot, in a hostile climate amongst consultants, with a fair bit of money coming from those who have used the system to hijack the apparatus of state? Well, that’s more easily said than done.
At any rate, while some of the particulars, which I’m going to try to take a greater look at this week, are slightly skewed, the report as a general is well-done and informative. Take a look, and hey, let me know what you catch.
they’ve been that way for decades, if not centuries (they advocated a free market solution to the irish potato famine). i have no doubt that their hostility to california’s initiative system is that it allows the left-leaning CA electorate to reject top-down shock doctrine neoliberal “reforms” of the sort that schwarzeneggar threw at us in all those special elections.
if revenue was passed with majority vote, california would not have a budget crisis, period. all the rest of the initiative stuff is peripheral to that central problem, and could be tweaked as necessary without risking collapse.
Wu beat me to it but maybe the view is clearer here in the valley. Finish the job on the 2/3rds & we go back to rational action- an Initiative for Nov 12 is probably in order. I can’t believe that Cantor actually advocated for a 2/3rds at the Federal Level- The Reps really do want to destroy this country.