Referenda

The Walnut Creek Windfall

Joe Mathews — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:09:00 -0400

In California, statewide initiatives have been slow to hit the streets. So where are our signature gatherers? A few are in other states. But judging by my sources, an army of gatherers seems to have convened in the eastside city of Walnut Creek.

Why? Money, of course. There's a huge fight between two mall owners -- one a company, Taubman Centers, that owns a mall in nearby Concord, and the mall giant Macerich, which supports establishing a Neiman Marcus in Walnut Creek's downtown Broadway Plaza. And each side has multiple measures working. The group opposing Neiman Marcus has circulated two referenda to reverse actions of the city council supporting the project. The pro-Neiman Marcus side has an initiative that could trump the referenda. Such fights between economic interests have become more and more common in California and other states, as disputes that once were fought in city councils and planning commissions spill onto the ballot.

What does this mean for petition circulators? A windfall. Gatherers in Walnut Creek say they are being paid $4 for each signature they collect outside retail establishments -- and $10 (yes, you read that right) a signature for door-to-door work. Those are among the highest payments for work on a local petition that I've ever seen in California. In the East Bay, it's Christmas in July.

A Bad Way To Save Cash

Joe Mathews — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:48:00 -0400

The Secretary of State in Washington wants to save some cash -- by limiting the descriptions and financial analyses of initiative and referendum to just one page in state ballot pamphlets. That means even the most complicated measures will have to be explained in 500 words or less. The Everett (Wash.) Herald explains why that's penny-wise, pound-foolish.

Direct Democracy In Indian Country

Joe Mathews — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:48:00 -0400

Several tribes, incluuld ding the Navajo nation, have ballot initiatives and referenda. Here's an interesting report on two ballot initiatives that have circulated for signatures. One would reduce the number of lawmakers in Navajo government and the other would give the elected president a line-item veto.

The Street Is Dry

Joe Mathews — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:52:00 -0500

There's a lot of talk about new ballot measures circulating in California and other Western states. The California Teachers Assn., for example, has approved circulation of its initiative that would hike the state sales tax to create a new, protected fund for schools. But that initiative isn't in petition circulators' hands yet, according to a survey I conducted this morning. In fact, signature gatherers appear to be in wait and see mode. There are a handful of local measures. In Sacramento, circulators were just told to turn in signatures on a measure that would seek to put more power in the office of Mayor Kevin Johnson. But that's about it, for now. I'll check back again in a week, when, various circulators assure me, they expect to be busy.

The Street

Joe Mathews — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 19:20:00 -0500

I spent part of the morning checking in with signature gatherers in California and in a handful of big Western states. No major statewide initiatives or referenda circulating at the moment, but that is expected to change in the next few days. I'll have more as various measures hit the street. And if readers of this blog come across signature gatherers in their travels, please let us know what they're hawking.

Tribe to State: Never Mind

Joe Mathews — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 16:45:00 -0500

Tribal gaming has been a frequent subject of initiative and referenda in California for the past decade. Back in February, labor forced referenda on four new gaming compacts between the state and Indian tribes. One of those tribes, Sycuan band, based in El Cajon, has failed to ratify the compact internally (despite approval from the U.S. Department of the Interior). This is shocking, because Sycuan spent millions to defend its compact (which would have authorized up to 5,000 slots and a second, off-reservation casino) and those of other tribes before voters. What's behind the decision? The economy and tribal politics. The Union-Tribune has details.

Strange New Presence in Signature Land

Joe Mathews — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 19:29:00 -0500

Let's try to have this blog do some reporting for me. I've been intrigued by ads like this one for signature gatherers that suggest the process is dirty. At the same time, the ad says there's lots of money to be made. (That's a new approach). The ads reference this site, http://www.petitionright.com/, which says its mission to eliminate the "for profit" initiative industry. The site identifies itself as part of a company called Green Economy Associates, with an address of Mesa, Arizona. The site is registered with a Nicholas Guillermo of same address. Mr. Guillermo explains himself a little in this separate blog. I've been hearing from signature gatherers asking, is this guy for real? Anyone know the answer to that question?

Winners and Losers In Initiative Land

Joe Mathews — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 13:51:00 -0500

Winners:

Political reform. In California, the big longshot -- redistricting reform, which has a near perfect record of losing at the ballot -- came in. Prop 11, which strips the legislature of the right to draw state legislative districts (Congressional districts were exempted) -- passed. It's a stunning win (and one your blogger predicted would not happen). This redistricting measure is a modest reform, but the victory suggests that political reform on the ballot may be possible -- at least if there isn't much of a campaign against it. Look for future measures on open primary and perhaps other reforms. And in Colorado, Prop 54 -- which had little money and faced a huge, expensive, labor campaign againts it -- also appears to have scored a triumph. The measure is a tight ban on "pay to play." If a company or union has a contract with the government, it can't give money. Labor leaders here in Denver last night say they will challenge it in court.

The initiative process. Voters turned down the greatest in the country to the initiative process, Arizona's "majority rules" measure, which would have established a near impossible standard for passing an initiative: a majority of all the state's registered voters (not just the voters who show up on election day). Measure O, a legislative referendum to make it more difficult to qualify an initiative to change the state constitution, also went down.

Farm animals. On a crowded California ballot, Prop 2, an initiative to regulate how farm animals are treated, passed overwhelmingly. The initiative's sponsor, the Humane Society of the United States, is all but certain to qualify similar measures in other initiative states.

Losers:

Marriage equality. Bans on same-sex marriage passed in Arizona, Florida, and, most disappointingly in California. The bans likely will be challenged in court, and in California, there may be a chance of overturning it. A 4-3 majority of California Supreme Court said there was a constitutional right to such unions back in May. There needs to be some real soul-searching about how the No on 8 effort was conducted. The no effort appeared to be well ahead in the polls a few months out, but lost ground with a confusing campaign that also seemed to antagonize religious people.

The pro-life movement. Attempts to restrict abortion went down to defeat in California, Colorado and South Dakota.

Billionaires. Peter Sperling and T. Boone Pickens poured big money (well at least big money for the rest of us) into poipular sounding renewable energy initiatives in California: Props 7 and 10. But both went down to defeat, badly.

Affirmative action. A ban on affirmative action, one of two initiatives backed by Californian Ward Connerly to make a state ballot, won in Nebraska. A similar measure trailed narrowly in Colorado. The race is so close there could be a recount.

More Referenda, Fewer Initiatives

Joe Mathews — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 18:52:00 -0500

Sunday in the Sacramento Bee, I wrote about my idea for reforming California's direct democracy. The piece is here. It's part of a weekly feature called "The Conversation." Please contribute your own thoughts on the idea. At root, the idea is to make it easier to qualify referenda -- ballot measures to block an act of the legislature -- for the ballot, and make it harder to qualify and pass initiatives. The idea is to make initiatives, which are common, rare, and to make referenda, which are rare, more common.

Be sure to read not just my piece but the three pieces the Bee solicited to respond to it. The one from Rick Hasen, a prominent election lawyer, details the most common objection from reformers. They don't like the initiative process, but they see it as the only way to enact their reforms. My view is that very little political reform takes place by initiative. In fact, reform has usually been set back by initiative (I don't consider term limits progress--it certainly didn't improve the quality of governance in my state). Please let me know what you think.

Turnout Apologies

Joe Mathews — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:45:00 -0400

BERN, Switzerland -- As a group of journalists and I (all of us cover direct democracy) make our way around this country by train and by bus on our way to a conference Wednesday, we keep meeting Swiss who boast -- politely -- about their direct democracy. They describe it as frustrating, problematic, but also as essential part of their political culture. There's one topic, however that they seem sheepish about: voter turnout.

It's low, very low. In Sunday's referendum and initiative elections in the canton of Zurich, the nation's largest, voter turnout came in at just 35 percent. And Denise Meyer, an election official there, described that as typical. In Uri, where direct democracy is a passion, a top canton minister described a turnout of 45 percent as pretty good.

The Swiss offer some excuses, but the problem seems to be that their direct democracy is so common a part of life, it doesn't inspire voters to the polls. Swiss voters often cast ballots as many as four times a year on referenda and initiatives. High turnout elections usually only involve high-profile issues -- anything having to do with getting the traditionally neutral country closer to Europe. Otherwise, most people stay home. The Swiss certainly make it easy to vote -- by mail, by email (and sometimes by text message, though I'll have a post later on the problems with this). and at the polls -- but making it easy doesn't bring folks out. Even here, it's the heat of controversy -- not civic duty -- that seems to drive turnout. Or to put it another way, a majority of Swiss seem to have a permanent case of voter fatigue.