Initiative

Why Do California Initiatives Draw So Many Legal Challenges?

Joe Mathews — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:17:00 -0500

This Oakland Tribune story, which quotes your blogger, suggests a number of factors, including the inflexibility of California's initiative system. It's so hard to change initiatives via other means that the default position is to go to court.

California Supremes To Consider Prop 8

Joe Mathews — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 20:28:00 -0500

No surprise, but the California Supreme Court today agreed to consider whether Prop 8 is constitutional. Both sides had sought a quick move by the court, and it looks like they're going to get it. More details here.

Other Prop 8 news: In a very interesting interview with the Sacramento Bee, California Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, who is African-American, said that the post-Prop 8 debate has been "racialized" (because of exit polls showing widespread black support for the Prop 8 ban on same sex marriage) and described how friends of her who attended anti-Prop 8 protests had racial epithets hurled at them.

Memo to Same Sex Marriage Supporters: Why I'm Dining at El Coyote Tonight

Joe Mathews — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 21:38:00 -0500

I've never cared for El Coyote, the Mexican restaurant on Beverly Boulevard in Los Angeles, even though it's within walking distance of my apartment. The best thing on the menu is the margaritas, and your blogger remains a teetotaler so he can stay sharp and detect drafting errors in initiatives. When I'm thinking Mexican, I hit the taco trucks, or maybe stop by the original El Cholo on Western or Mijares in my hometown of Pasadena.

But I'm heading over there tonight. Why? Because same-sex marriage supporters, full of righteous anger at the passing of Prop 8, the ban on same-sex marriage, have targeted El Coyote as part of an insane, counter-productive strategy of mindless rage at anyone or anything tangentially connected to the Prop 8 effort. The niece of the restaurant's original owners gave $100 to Yes on 8. The response? A boycott and lots of Internet rage.

As your blogger has made clear here and in the pages of the Washington Post, he strongly supports same-sex marriage and marriage equality. But I can't support the post-election fit of rage -- which appears to be an attempt at political suicide by gay marraige supporters. It's time to calm down, respect the results, figure out what went wrong and then go to work on a strategy to bring marriage equality to California -- and more important, to the country as a whole. This kind of El Coyote madness simply hurts that cause. The exact opposite tactic is needed. Painful as it may be, supporters of same-sex marriage need to seek out those who voted for Prop 8 and do some serious listening to them. Why did they vote yes? And is there any way they can be convinced to change their minds? Perhaps such a meeting could take place at, well, not El Coyote, but someplace with better Mexican food.

Did Anti-Obama Feeling Boost Arkansas Ban On Gay Adoption?

Joe Mathews — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:50:00 -0500

The New York Times seems to think so. In this piece, the Times says that an Arkansas initiative to ban adoption by unmarried couples (a measure clearly targeted at gays) passed because white Arkansas Democrats didn't like Obama and stayed home, thus hurting the measure. The evidence of that is hardly clear. Turnout appears to have been down among white Democrats, but it's far from clear that such Democrats who stayed at home would have opposed the ban. It's common to link the results of candidate races to the results of initiative elections, but the correlation is not strong. In California, some are blaming the victory of Prop 8 on socially conservative African Americans who turned out for Obama but also supported a ban on same-sex marriage. Maybe. But the margin in that race is such -- and the percentage of black voters is small enough -- that the gay marriage ban might well have succeeded in spite of any turnout effect. The margin in Arkansas was even wider on the adoption measure.

When an initiative outcome goes against you, it's common to blame factors outside your control. This sort of excuse-making is natural after heartbreaking defeats, such as the Prop 8 victory (a defeat for the cause of marriage equality in California) and and the triumph of this Arkansas measure (a defeat for the rights of gay couples and families, and for the prospects of unwanted children). But while it's easier said than done, advocates for gay rights and adoption need to realize that the loss is their own, avoid blaming other factors, and instead look for new ways to organize and to reshape campaign strategies so they can win again in the future.

Marty, How the Hell Did You Lose The Prop 10 Campaign?

Joe Mathews — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:43:00 -0500

Marty Wilson, a leading Sacramento political consultant who is a favorite of your blogger, managed the campaign in favor of Prop 10, the T. Boone Pickens-backed $5 billion general obligation bond to fund alternative fuels. Prop 10 lost badly, despite the fact that it had overwhelming financial support and an opposition with little funding.

Wilson, a good-natured sort, asks himself the following question: at Fox & Hounds Daily: “Marty, how the Hell did you lose the Proposition 10 campaign when you were funded and your opposition had no money?” To which I answer, “It was harder than you think.” The rest of the story is here. His explanation of why the measure went down -- the cost, the size of the state's budget crisis -- matches the political problems I discussed earlier this fall in the Scientific American.

Department of Self Promotion

Joe Mathews — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:24:00 -0500

Last night on the nationally syndicated radio show Beyond the Beltway, I discussed the problems with the No on 8 campaign that led to victory for the California initiative to ban same-sex marriage.

Stop It. Just Stop It

Joe Mathews — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 16:37:00 -0500

The Prop 8 election returns are in, but the campaign isn't over. Opponents of Prop 8 -- that is, supporters of same-sex marriage -- staged protests on the west side of Los Angeles yesterday afternoon and evening., temporarily shutting down traffic on two major thoroughfares. Protestors targeted Mormons with signs and marched on the Mormon temple on Santa Monica Boulevard.

This is dumb on so many levels it's hard to know where to start. First off, it would have been nice to see this kind of coordination and effort before the election. Second, targeting Mormons didn't work during the election--in fact, it appeared to turn off religious voters -- folks whom same-sex marriage supporters need if they're going to develop the consensus needed. Why keep repeating the same mistake? Third, the protests likely angered the hundreds of thousands of people who have to commute through the westside of LA; it's a safe bet that most of those inconvenienced are sympathetic to same-sex marriage supporters. (If you want to block traffic, do it on the East side for goodness sakes). And fourth, the election is over, and it doesn't help the cause of marriage equality to keep the Prop 8 campaign alive. It's time to turn the page on Prop 8 -- it wasn't a good moment for supporters of same-sex marriage -- and find new strategies to achieve marriage equality. Court challenges are promising. I'm told that today, an initiative to repeal Prop 8 may be filed. It would likely go on the ballot in the spring of 2010.

Bad Night for Marriage Equality

Joe Mathews — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 04:48:00 -0500

Bans on same-sex marriage appear to have won in Florida and Arizona. And Prop 8, the California ban on gay marriage, is leading early, with nearly 53 percent of the vote. That number will likely shrink as the night goes on. Early tallies are heavy with mail ballots; those voters tend to be older, and age is the best predictor of how people vote on same-sex marriage. It's possible that this race will remain so tight that we may not know the outcome for days, if not weeks.

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.

Non-Partisan Initiative Withdrawn

Joe Mathews — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 20:04:00 -0400

Steve Peace, a former California budget director, had recently filed an initiative to end partisan elections in the state. He has now withdrawn it, according to the Secretary of State's office. I've contacted the firm listed as the contact point for the initiative, but no response.