Ballot Initiatives

Ballot initiatives. The phrase conjures up the image of an informed citizenry taking charge of the democratic process, standing up to entrenched power, and bypassing the corporate and political establishments in order to get something good done for the people.

Alas, the reality is much different. From virtually the get-go, ballot initiatives and referenda - the closest our republic has come to "direct democracy" - have been compromised and exploited by the very forces they were supposed to counter-balance.

In the early twentieth century, Populists and Progressives saw the initiative process as a way of counterbalancing Big Business, but then and since, the process has been corrupted by money and powerful special interests. In addition, even when they have embodied the "will of the people" (i.e., at least 50 percent of the voting public), such measures have often had anti-progressive and anti-populist consequences. Women's suffrage, for example, was actually delayed by the initiative process, since elected leaders were actually farther out in front on the issue than most voters. Finally, ballot measures can have a steamrolling effect on public policy because, whereas legislatures generally have to balance competing interests, initiatives, if passed, codify a single or narrowly defined policy position (see Richard J. Ellis, Democratic Delusions: The Initiative Process in America, University of Kansas, 2002).

The turning point in the modern era came with California's notorious Prop. 13, the 1978 anti-tax initiative that sparked a nationwide "tax revolt" by tapping into powerful strains of pocketbook protectionism and anti-government feeling among the electorate. As Thomas Cronin notes in Direct Democracy: The Politics of Initiative, Referendum & Recall (iUniverse, 1999), more people voted on Prop. 13 in that year than in the gubernatorial contest - a vivid illustration of how American voters conceive of their real interests. The result? Only one-third of the tax cut benefitted single-family households; the rest went to industrial interests and apartment building owners, according to Thomas Goebel (A Government by the People: Direct Democracy in America, 1890-1940, University of North Carolina, 2002). Local governments in California have been impoverished, and the average person has suffered the consequences.

Since then, conservative interest groups have seized their opportunities. While the media have paid much attention to such hot-button topics as medical marijuana and gay marriages, the most important fights have centered on initiatives originating within the conservative movement. These have been important frequently because they bear directly on the political process.

In 1998, for example, one of the costliest and nastiest campaigns involved California's Prop. 226, which would have restricted the ability of labor unions to spend members' dues on political activities. Although the backers of that initiative eventually lost, the consistent advantage lies with conservatives, given their much closer association with corporations and moneyed interests. Votes may carry the day ultimately, but dollars buy the political consultants, the airtime, and the direct mailings that produce votes. And now, with the passage of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance legislation, look for a surge in the money being spent on ballot initiatives. Not that it's been paltry so far. Consider:

* In Montana, in response to sky-high energy costs, consumer advocates and the Montana Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) have gathered enough signatures to qualify Initiative 145, which would allow the state to buy and operate the state's privately operated hydroelectric dams. Good luck. They're being outspent 46-to-1 by out-of-state power companies.

* In Arizona, as of August 21, seven organizations had raised over $19 million to promote ballot initiatives - compared to about $6 million raised by 40 candidates for state office.

Such numbers seem to provide confirmation of Thomas Goebel's grim assessment of the historical legacy of the rise of ballot initiatives and referenda: "Direct democracy proved unable to create a government that could withstand the influence of wealth and corporate power in America. A reform idea steeped in the tradition of American anti-monopoly sentiment created a set of tools highly adaptable to corporate interests and political strategies."

Despair not, however. The best response at a grass-roots level is to stay well informed and keep careful track of which measures on the ballot serve which interests. Reading the fine print takes a little extra time, but the most important piece of information is usually the array of funders behind any particular initiative - beneath the pleasant-sounding rhetoric used to describe a measure, the hard dollars reveal what's really at stake. It's also crucial to encourage friends, family, and neighbors to make sure they actually vote on all this stuff. Consider getting together with a group of friends and neighbors just before the election to go over the sample ballot - who's backing each measure and who stands to benefit, regardless of what the TV and radio ads proclaim. Money may lubricate the machinery, but individual votes still matter in the end.

Ultimately, our society, or individual states, may decide to reform the initiative process to make it more truly democratic. In the meantime, it's up to us to try to reclaim the promise of direct democracy from the forces of corporate and ideological conservatism.

Two good sources of reliable information about ballot initiatives are the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center (a progressive site) and the non-partisan Initiative and Referendum Institute.

Tags: , , , , , , ,