Reform would force Secretary of State to hew to state Constitutional requirements
California Constitution, Art. II, Sec 8(c)
(c) The Secretary of State shall then submit the measure at the next general election held at least 131 days after it qualifies or at any special statewide election held prior to that general election. The Governor may call a special statewide election for the measure.
That would be the founding document of our state government, with a requirement that initiatives gathering sufficient signatures to qualify for the ballot be placed on the next general election. However, over the years, as the Legislature has put measure after measure on primary ballots for expediency, or whatever reason, and the various secretaries of state over the past 40 years just put the signature-based initiatives on the primary ballot. Ho-Hum.
Except that really isn’t what the Constitution states, and there is a good reason for that. Primary elections have wildly shifting electorates, in good ways and bad. Of course, the June primary this year is just one such example. The Republican base is going to be motivated, or at least somewhat motivated, while Democrats don’t have a presidential primary, as of yet, to get excited.
And, as you may know, “paycheck deception” is now headed to the ballot. And given that they have now pulled the measure off the streets, it seems likely that they have the signatures. Paycheck deceptions not only threatens the power of labor, but also of the Democratic party. So, you know, the Legislature is getting some pleas from labor to help pull the initiative system back to 1971:
Democratic legislators are considering an 11th hour bill that would shift all initiative ballot measures to the November ballot — a move that, if enacted, would help their union allies stave off some measures they oppose.(SacBee)
Thing is, we probably never should have strayed from the Constitution, and now that we’ve let it go for this long, we look very kind of strange making the big change now. But, the Constitution is the Constitution, and getting the SoS to act like Art. II exists seems like a reasonable goal no matter how the winds of a particular election are blowing at our backs or into our face.
UPDATE: CalBuzz ran a story with a bunch of background on the legal definitions.
so since the tied is turning against the liberals on initiatives its better to curb popular power and limit it to general election when the liberal mass decides they want to participate.
Let’s see if the GOP tried to change the rules the democrats would be crying “corporate power grab!.”
But cheers to you Brian for being forthright in seeing that this will only make the Democrats look bad. The best way to salvage themselves from hypocrisy is to put a future date for this to go into effect, like 2016 or 2020 where no one knows what or who will be on the ballot.
The constitution says ” next general election… or at any special statewide election held prior to that general election.” that would imply primaries, wouldn’t it? So they have been doing it exactly how the constitution says to do it.
It’s tempting to interpret primary elections as the “special statewide election” mentioned in the constitution but they clearly do not qualify. All these past years with primary election initiatives look like they were in violation. The best rundown on the election law on this is in Calbuzz’ story from the weekend:
http://bit.ly/oBm67i
I dont like the idea how the Democratic Party is gaming the system, but at least it defers a SB 48 repeal measure to November instead of June, so if we have to fight those people we will at least have a fighting chance.
…these initiatives, referendums, bond issues, etc. should all be on the general election ballot-period! this will benefit the broader electorate in the long run. there is no good reason not to do it this way. over the yrs these initiatives in the primary have benefited both parties-prop 13 for instance was in june, 1978-u had a gop primary for gov.-brown was running for reelection. in june, 2004 that mental health/millionaires tax was passed, im sorry but i dont remember its name. so both sides have benefitted. ill also say that i believe both wouldve passed anyways in a general election. but at least then it wouldve been more representative of the pple/electorate.
The Sec of State has released the SB48 repeal (FAIR Education Act) repeal (# 11-0023) for general circulation. Refer to
http://www.sos.ca.gov/election…
Now, take a look at what the petition will look like on the clipboard. Facebook has this download, so, as a sample, does this website.
http://calvaryplacerville.com/…
The “full title and text” appears to be LGBT-sympathetic, and it is: it’s the text of the original bill, passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor. The referendum petition here would put it up for repeal, if enough people sign it.
It’s quite easy for a petition gatherer to tell passers by that this is “for gay rights,” and quite possible, on a careless reading, to think it is.
FYI, FWIW.