The Proposition Must Be Abolished

The proposition (aka “ballot initiative”) is a horrible way to make law. California has been afflicted with it since the early 20th century, when it was introduced with the Progressive Movement. Since then, the state has become a fractured, unworkable, special-interest-driven disaster. If enough signatures are gathered – and millions of dollars raised to spread propaganda – a proposition is placed on the ballot where it is approved or rejected by voters.

Propositions strike at the heart of what a republic is: smart government. After all, California is modeled after the federal system: It has three branches of government – legislative, executive and judicial – and a bicameral legislature, made up of the lower-house Assembly and the upper-house Senate. Under this system, the idea is balance of power. The people elect lawmakers to the legislature who in turn make laws. Those laws are then approved, rejected (vetoed), or enforced by the Executive and checked by the Judiciary to determine if the laws are constitutional. Lawmakers are [supposed to be] intelligent and educated individuals who reason with each other and make compromises; through this, we get wise government. If we the people are unhappy with their performance, we can either elect someone else during the next election or recall (impeach on the national level) them. The proposition completely bypasses this checks-and-balances system.

There have been many terrible propositions in California over the century. Some of the worst are Propositions 8, 13 and 140.

Proposition 8, passed by voters in November 2008, banned same-sex marriage. Earlier that year, the California Supreme Court struck down the previous ban on same-sex marriage – Proposition 22 (2000) – and said that homosexual couples had the legal right to wed. Opponents of the decision claimed that the court’s decision would lead to societal breakdown and with nearly $40 million and backing from the Mormon Church and conservative groups, Prop 8 was added to the constitution. This is a classic example of what Thomas Jefferson called “Tyranny of the majority,” where the majority (voters) took away the rights of a minority (same-sex couples). Whether one approves of same-sex relationships or not is not the point; a minority had its rights denied simply because the majority said so.

Proposition 13, passed by voters in 1978, put a limit on the amount of property taxes levied on property owners. At first glance, it sounds like an excellent idea; limit the government’s ability to increase taxes on property. However, after Prop 13, local governments – whose main source of revenue had been property taxes – had to find other ways to generate revenue once money was severely reduced. Thanks to Prop 13, the state is now responsible for supporting local budgets and schools while local governments are left scavenging for funding from sales taxes and fees. Voters were angry at the government for raising taxes and rather than research where their communities get funding, they passed a proposition that essentially crippled them.

Proposition 140, passed by voters in 1990, put term limits on politicians into place. It sounds good in theory: limit assemblypersons to three two-year terms and senators to two four-year terms. Arguments for Prop 140 included claims that it would eliminate professional politicians, make the legislature more diverse and break special interest networks. Now, we have bitter, partisan lawmakers who don’t work together to make law in a reasoned manner. These days, legislators are too busy trying to bring their own agenda to Sacramento or running their campaigns for their next term or next position. Prior to 1990, it took a couple terms for an assemblyperson or senator to truly understand and grasp their office and its responsibilities. Now, by the time they know what they’re actually doing, they are term-limited out of office. California is complex and experience and reason are desperately needed.

There are many more examples because the proposition itself is a flawed way to make laws. Instead of relying on intelligent lawmakers to design policy, anyone who’s registered to vote can simply make their own laws if they don’t agree with what the government is doing. With this, minority rights are threatened, local governments are crippled and politicians are more partisan than ever. This is why direct democracy is a horrible idea. The proposition must be abolished.

 

Advertisements

Prop 8 Overturned!

Prop 8 has been overturned. Today, California joins Iowa, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Washington DC in recognizing same-sex marriages. Regardless of how you feel about gay marriage, this is a great day for the Constitution.

Since all Americans receive – or are supposed to receive – equal treatment and protection under the law, logic would dictate that this also includes two people who are in a committed relationship.

America is a beacon of liberty and equality for all who are privileged to live here. If you’re not depriving anyone of their life, liberty or pursuit of happiness, you are encouraged to make your own life, live free and pursue your own happiness.

Just because one group – or groups – of people get together and declare another inferior does not in any way mean they then have the right to legally enslave them. Thomas Jefferson warned against this: he called it the “tyranny of the majority” in which the majority decides and dictates the rights of the minority.

In November 2008, California voters – many mislead through deceptive television ads and misinformation through “family” groups as well as the Mormon Church’s finances – approved Proposition 8 by a narrow 52%, which overturned the state court’s decision five months earlier allowing same-sex marriage in the Golden State.

21 months and two court challenges later, gay couples can now once again marry if they decide to.

Opposition has already planned to appeal to the 9th Circuit Court, whom I expect will uphold the decision. Should the US Supreme Court pick up the case (doubtful), they will either uphold today’s decision or maintain the ban. In that situation, I expect them to agree that homosexuals do in fact have the right to marry. This would strike down same-sex marriage bans in 41 states and overturn President Clinton’s “Defense of Marriage Act,” making the United States the 11th nation on the planet to legalize same-sex marriage.

Canada, Argentina, South Africa, Iceland, Portugal, Spain, The Netherlands, Belgium, Norway and Sweden all recognize same-sex marriage. Isn’t it time that the pioneering and forward-thinking United States joined?