California Propositions Are a Bankrupt Idea
Quite a few years back, I had a debate with a friend. I disliked California's Proposition system, he thought it was great.
I am here to proclaim victory in the debate.
The Proposition System in California, while noble in theory, is an ill-thought out disaster. Somewhat like New Coke, the Edsel and Viet Nam. Miserable failure was the only likely outcome.
It was based on the premise of full-participation democracy of an informed citizenry, but even the Founding Fathers understood that that had its limits. America is not a democracy, it's a representative democracy. This is the concept that most people just want to know where the On switch is for their computer, not how electronics works. When it comes to laws, just pass the things, and if we don't like them, we'll vote you out.
However poorly one thinks of politicians, the Proposition System is worse. It starts with the faulty premise that the voting public is going to willingly study a thick guidebook. The voting public didn't willingly study even thin guidebooks when they were in high school and required to. Instead, with propositions, they turn to watching 30-second TV ads to learn what the laws are about.
Watching 30-second TV ads to learn what a law is about is like reading a fortune cookie and believing that you now understand Eastern Philosophy.
Initially, the Proposition System had its successes mixed among warning signs. That's when the legal equivalent of the San Andreas Fault hit in 1978. Proposition 13 - the most appropriately-numbered law ever. This wasn't just bad luck, this was The Big One.
For years, a crotchety coot named Howard Jarvis would annually try to get some loony proposition passed against having taxes. It was wildly entertaining, though a bit annoying, like watching a rapid dog yowl nightly at the moon. But in 1978, the moon yowled back, and his co-sponsored Proposition 13 actually passed. And the joke was on California.
On the surface, Proposition 13 appeared to be about limits on property taxes. What it actually did was send California crashing to ruin. It wasn't just that revenues plummeted, but that Proposition 13 required a "supermajority" of two-thirds vote in the state legislature for any tax increase.
The resulting problem is that the public keeps voting proposition initiatives to improve the state - yet they vote against bills to pay for it. And the state itself is unable to raise revenues to make up the difference.
(Side note: in the comedy, "Airplane!", a passenger gets in Robert Hayes' cab, just as the cabbie leaps out. That's actually Howard Jarvis. He sits in the taxi the entire movie, the butt of the joke, as the meter keeps running. Alas, talk about a prescient metaphor. California's meter has been running ever since.)
The additional problem with the Proposition System is that, unlike when a legislator puts himself on the line when passing laws, there is no one to vote out of office if a proposition screws things up. No one is responsible. So, the death spiral continues.
The result is that the California budget deficit is now $26.3 billion. The state sent out IOUs last week.
Certainly, there are many causes for the problems California faces today. But the root of the problem is that the California Proposition System is a system that allows reckless action without accountability. And worse, it's a system that increasingly does the very opposite of its original intent of full democratic participation of the public: the more propositions, the less the public wants to study them all - and the fewer people who vote. In the most recent special election this past June, specifically to deal with the state's budget crisis, voter turnout was a paltry 28.4 percent.
Worse still, because of another proposition - term limits - representatives know they have no political future, regardless of what they do in office, so there's no need to work out issues in the state legislature with your opponents, but just vote in self interest. The result is gridlock.
When you let politicians do what you elected them to do - for all the good and ill - at least you are getting 100% of the electorate represented in the results. And if you don't like those results, you can vote your officials out. But with the Proposition System, a mere quarter of the public is at times deciding how the state should be run. Based on watching 30-second TV ads. With no accountability.
How can anyone be shocked to discover that people vote for things they like, vote against paying taxes - and a $26.3 billion deficit is created because a near-impossible two-thirds supermajority is needed to fix things?! And you throw out your leader to bring in an movie actor with no political experience to get you out of the mess.
This is no way to run a democracy.
Make no mistake, it crosses all parties.
In California, majority doesn't rule. It's the tyranny of the minority, but worse it's too often the tyranny of the irrational. The California Proposition System may have begun with a noble intent, but it was ill-conceived, and has become selfish, greedy, mindless, unworkable and a disaster.
There is only one proposition worthy of having on the ballot and voting for. A proposition that would get rid of the California Proposition System.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Thank you for this post! It's time for us all to begin speaking out. I've lived in California for 75 years and I've never seen a mess worse than this one. I don't like having my state held hostage by a small group of hard-headed ideologues. There was a reason our founding fathers didn't establish a nation based on a direct democracy and California is providing a demonstration of how badly it works.
The California budget situation was briefly mentioned. It needs to be pointed out that the governor has vetoed two budgets and that he is the one who should be shouldering the blame for this mess.
Agreed! A credit rating of BBB will cost us plenty in California and create a national depression since California is the seventh of eighty largest economy is the world.
Arnold should go back where he came from. Just because someone took steroids and has big muscles doesn't make him a good governor. Americans need to re-examine their values. Movie actors are front men. I remember when Reagan came to Sacramento. He attacked the University of California.
All we need now is a proposition that allows the state to finally legalize and tax marijuana. Budget crisis would be solved, and the proposition system would prove it's worth.
And the politicians in Sacramento wouldn't have to risk their political futures by voting for something so sensible.
If the proposition system is so bad, why can't they get this done? It's the obvious thing to do. But I'm pretty sure only the actual voters could get that done through the proposition system.
Sorry Robert, but I disagree. California already gets 10% of my income as state tax, sales tax, property tax. It has to end somewhere. The state should be able to get by on that. And if it can't, it needs to give something back. Free the weed. It's time for another proposition.
Political lobbyists were too busy outlawing gay marriage to focus on things that might actually generate some revenue.
Political lobbyists were too busy trying to pass gay marriage to focus on things that might actually generate some revenue or cut spending.
Well, two things. Pot is partially legal in Cali but the FEDERAL drug laws are holding it back.
And you say making it legal means you get tax revenue from it, but the moment you win you'll be another baby crying not to tax YOUR thing.
IS democracy a failure because of how the conservatives have misused it?
Since everyone else LETS them do it, I'd say that is a pretty much a yes.
Last I checked California was a Blue State; you figure it out
The DLC Dems are conservatives, corporatist. look it up.
But we had Arnold forced down our throats.
Here is a proposition:
Make it illegal with stiff prison terms to hire signature gatherers or pay for publicity of propositions. This prevents corporations, special interests and the rich from having a greater voice than the public.
Have more frequent ballot initiative and referendums, not fewer, to keep up with changing conditions and make these cheap and easy for everyone to participate. Make propositions and vote online, by phone, by snail mail. Public libraries have free online access for those who don't have computers.
Direct democracy and representative government clash because the people's interests are different from the interests of the Big Money that buys politician "representatives".
The California Supreme Court decision regarding the legality of Proposition 8, while flawed at many levels, was most egregious because it affirmed the wide ranging powers of the Ballot Measure Proposition and left in tact a legal process which gives almost unfettered dictatorial powers to the whims and fancies of mass hysteria.
This California Supreme Court ruling also means that any human right, including the right to marry, can be taken away by a simple majority of voters during an election cycle. Furthermore the court decision disregards in both letter and the spirit the quintessential founding document of the United States, the Declaration of Independence, which states:
“We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
For Californians “Rights” are something which can now be given and taken away, as Shakespeare said, by “the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.” The fact that California has a functioning legal process giving voters such wide ranging powers to make law is the most serious fundamental flaw in the State Constitution.
Is this any way to run Republic?
What a terrible idea. Let people decide how to run the government and make the laws. How undemocratic!
Agreed! The function of the constitution and courts should in large part be to protect unpopular minorities from the prejudices of the currently powerful majority. It should never be possible for the majority to take away the rights of a minority. The California Supreme Court sacrificed principle for politics. (Former Californian; proud Iowan, where we usually defend minorities and have done so for 160 years.)
Bill Maher said it a lot better.
See Joseph A. Palermo's Profile
http://www
I have lived in California for many decades (almost 6).
The Initiative and Referendum system allows for "hair-brain legislation" that is often ill-considered and almost always funded by big business or churches. Insurance initiatives are common since the required signatures can be paid for by special interests. So often the propositions are so poorly written that courts must strain the interpretation.
Prop 13 was a disaster because it established a two-tier tax structure. The necessity of getting a 2/3 vote on the budget is also a disaster.
Prop 8 was a classical example of the fact that a mere majority of the voters could define a constitutional issue such as the definition of marriage.
The hype in the media is used for propaganda purposes to keep wedge issues front and center rather than to deal with real issues, or at least life and death issues like water and earthquake preparedness.
Gay procreation issues are very important here but nobody cares about a dam breaking, for example. If all the hypocritical people would put their efforts into helping others, education and jobs, we could easily solve the real problems. Katrina would look like a picnic when the big one hits the wrong place.
I live in CA. I read my pamphlets. If I don't understand the law or where the money would come from to pay for the law. I simply say NO. In fact for most propositions in the last few years they have gotten so complicated, I HAVE to say NO.
I system is flawed, but seeing as the legislature can't be persuaded to vote in my best interests. I don't really see a way to change it.
Term Limits were voted in to break some of the vote apathy that allowed some politicians like Willie Brown to be voted in again and again despite his lack of care for his constituents. The idea was to get some fresh faces in the state legislature and to keep them fresh. Again seeing as our "Career" politicians vote in the interest of what ever corporate lobbyist pays the most, Term limits seem like a wash to me.
BTW the supermajority on Taxes law. I thought that was a later proposition that did that. I remember that being on a ballot that I had a say on (unlike prop 13 where I was too young to say yay nor nay).
Prop 13 did good things to help lower middle class families to keep their houses. Too bad that our Republican Governers and Legislature choose to make up the revenue differences by harming our schools. Total political vindictiveness that Californians are still paying for.
"There is only one proposition worthy of having on the ballot and voting for. A proposition that would get rid of the California Proposition System."
Hey, that's my line!
Thanks for this perfect articulation of a perfect mess, Mr. Elisberg.
No more Props!
Thank you for posting this - finally someone is saying it! The proposition system is flawed beyond repair. The Prop 8 debacle is only one example -- I am still scratching my head as to how the Cal Supreme Court found that our "right" to amend the constitution by proposition trumps fundamental equal rights.
I cannot count the number of times some ill-informed person has asked me to sign a petition for a proposition in front of Safeway or near public transit. I never sign them because I have no idea what I am asked to sign. Most of the time the person with the petition cannot provide any real information. However, it is obvious that people hear the 1 second "soundbite" about what the proposition is supposedly for and sign them, and next thing you know its on the ballot. Clearly many of the propositions get a title that does not really reflect what the proposed law will actually do should the proposition pass.
Moreover, many of the propositions that make it to the ballot do not make any sense to the average person. I'm an attorney and I find many of them incomprehensible when I've read the materials provided before the election!
There is a reason we elect legislators to pass laws. Please get rid of the pointless proposition system!!
The problem isn't that California has too much democracy. The problem is that California voters have behaved irresponsibly. Americans in various states have used voter initiatives since 1777 and it generally seems to have worked well. In my state of Massachusetts, we have used voter initiatives to pass a lot of good legislation (IMHO). Seriously folks, if Mr Elisberg ever suggests that MY state give up its voter initiative rights, then he will be the first person tarred and feathered on Boston Common since we ran the king's tax collectors out of town!
Mostly right on this one, but there are other factors at work ruining California as well:
-Illegal immigration
-Too many people
-Too little rain
-Gerrymandering political districts
-Too much power in teacher and prison guard unions
-Stupid budget rules
And while Propostions may be part of what's ruining the state, property owners can't bear the entire burden.
California's high tax rate drives business away, too.
It's time to reduce public spending.
Yes, reduce public spending, what a novel idea - but a core problem, "the public keeps voting proposition initiatives to improve the state - yet they vote against bills to pay for it". A missing part of California is commonsense, in the people and now in the legislature that cannot understand the concept of reducing spending in order to reduce the huge debt load....
Please list the propositions and what they cost. Is it more than the revenue created by propositions?
Yup. Pace Hiram Johnson, the system no longer works. But vested interests support it, which he would have abhorred. We need a Constitutional Convention to rewrite the rules; we need to at least except commercial property from Prop 13 and remove 2/3 rule on budgets and taxes. We already have district reform which could make a difference soon, but not yet. We need to remove the earmarks like Prop 98 and others that make it virtually impossible for the legislature to function, even if it wanted to, which it often doesn't. We need a technocratic, transparent review of state spending system, including the role of unions, and perhaps deal with state and unions as in business, where concession agreements can be made to save a business from bankruptcy. And the people of California need to start thinking more in terms of Me and more in terms of Us. (full disclosure: I live in CA)
Sorry, but our representative democratic REPUBLIC has failed us miserably.
Given the choice, I'd go with more real democracy, not less.
Exactly. Representative democracy is an oxymoron.
For the ancient Greeks, inventors of the concept, democracy was the rule of the demos, the overwhelming majority of the people, through direct, participatory democracy. For the ancient Greeks election was inherently undemocratic. Politics, the act by which we decide how our society should be structured, was considered so essential that for Athens a person who was not political (i.e., did not participate) was considered to be not human (i.e., prisoners taken in wars could not be political and thus were not human- their justification for slavery).
What Hamilton and Madison gave us, instead, is a system in which every two to six years we choose someone from the elites to rule over us, and the masses of the people are passive, depoliticized, and completely absent from the process in which the form of society is decided. (See John Stewart's interview with Bill Moyers for an excellent insight into what this has given us).
Given this depoliticized demos, what would you expect when they actually get a say in some small fragment of the decisions of society but contradictory, unworkable decisions. The answer is more democracy, more participation, more politics, not less.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
