Brace yourselves, voters
California voters will be getting a breather on June 5, with just two state propositions on the ballot, on term limits and a tobacco tax. Each fits the reasonable standard for an initiative: It’s an issue the Legislature either cannot or will not address, and neither adds a burden to the general fund.
It’s going to be a different story in November, when Californians will be voting on death and taxes and almost everything in between. Petitions are being circulated for dozens of issues big and small: high-speed rail, genetically engineered foods, regulating health premiums, parental notification on abortion, oil-extraction tax, tuition freeze, treatment of commercial property under Prop. 13.
It could be one of the longest ballots in state history. It’s almost certain that voters will consider more initiatives in November than they did in the entire decade of the 1960s, when nine reached the statewide ballot.
The need for initiative reform has not gone away.
Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, a Sacramento Democrat and one of the more thoughtful leaders in the Capitol, has made initiative reform one of his missions in his final term.
What is significant about Steinberg’s approach, as outlined in a recent speech to the Sacramento Press Club, is that he approaches it with an equal respect for representative and direct democracy. He does not see it as a choice between “power to the people” and “legislators know best.” He sees the two roles as complementary. “The question is: How can we improve the initiative process to improve representative government,” he said in his speech to the Press Club on April 19.
Steinberg has offered three changes, which he hopes to put on the November 2014 ballot, either by an act of the Legislature — that would require a twothirds vote, plus the governor’s signature — or, if that fails, by a citizen initiative. They are:
Once an initiative has qualified for the ballot, give the Legislature a defined period to amend the initiative to fix obvious problems or to pass a bill that would satisfy the proponents’ objectives and compel them to withdraw their ballot measure. This would address two of the biggest problems with the initiative process. One, a poorly drafted initiative cannot be altered after signature gathering — such as the 1996 campaign reform measure (Prop. 212) that inadvertently repealed a ban on gifts to legislators and other public officials. It was defeated. The other problem with initiatives is their inflexibility: Once passed, they cannot be changed when unintended consequences arise. Ten states allow this “indirect initiative” option, giving legislators one last chance to act before an all-or-nothing measure goes to the ballot.
Laws enacted by voters could be repealed by an act of the Legislature, with the governor’s signature, after 10 years. Such “sunset clause” provisions are available in 23 states.
In perhaps the most controversial of Steinberg’s proposals, legislators could put an initiative — including a tax increase — on the ballot by majority vote. The danger of such a provision is that it