Ballot Measure

The initiative process tends to be popular, and attempts to restrict it tend to be unpopular. But an Arizona ballot initiative to restrict the power of the initiative might have appeared at the right time. Signature gathering in that state is an ongoing scandal, with several measures being knocked off the ballot because so many signatures turned out to be invalid.

The initiative, which qualified for the ballot late last week, would require that any initiative that requires new spending or taxes would have to receive not just a majority of all people voting but a majority of all registered voters before taking effect. That sets a high bar. But it may be a good idea. As my New America colleague Mark Paul has noted, voter-approved spending via initiative has become a major factor in California's budget troubles.

According to the language that established it, the Children's Trust in Miami-Dade County must be renewed in this Tuesday's primary elections by county voters. The trust dedicates 50 cents of every $1,000 in assessed property value to improving the lives of children. The money goes to child care, parent counseling, and school health teams. It has bipartisan support. What could be the problem?

Poor ballot design. In several Dade County precincts, the measure to reauthorize the Children's Trust has been placed on the back of the ballot. So voters will have to turn over their ballot to find it. Let's hope they do. Or this could be another major disaster for Florida election officials.

That's today's California quote of the day from Democratic spinner extraordinaire Steve Maviglio. He's talking about Monday's supposed 5 p.m. deadline to remove a high-speed rail bond measure from the November ballot and replace it with a more carefully drafted bond on the same subject. The legislature, which is facing Gov. Schwarzenegger's threat to veto every bill that reaches his desk until there's a budget deal, failed to pull the switcheroo yesterday. But there may still be more time. Secretary of State Debra Bowen has set Saturday as a deadline for adding measures, but the problem in this case is that the measure being removed is scheduled to be in the voter guide. There is no precedent for removing a measure from the ballot that's already appeared in the guide sent to voters.

Yep, Aug. 11 and California still hasn't passed a budget for the new fiscal year, which is 42 days old. And things could get much worse this week. California's budget negotiations are complicated, and a potential compromise could include the addition of various measures to the November ballot. Among possible measures would be a rainy day fund and some mechanism to change the lottery to clear the path for borrowing against future revenues. 

But there's a problem: time. Legal deadlines and printing deadlines for the November ballots are upon us, so time is short for adding new measures. The Secretary of State has identified this coming Saturday, Aug. 16, as the deadline for adding new measures to the ballot. There may be a little bit of give in that. (I could see the secretary of state agreeing to a short extension of a few days if legislators and the governor are close to a deal). But not much. So if there is no budget deal this week, the framework for negotiations would vanish. And California's budget stalemate could continue for many more weeks.

Every time a school bond is voted down in Southern California, we hear recriminations about selfish voters or older people or white people who are unwilling to pay to educate our state's immigrant children. Well, voters in Los Angeles have been among the more generous, approving four multibillion dollar school bonds in the past decade. But I suspect the $7 billion LA Unified School District bond just placed on the ballot is in deep trouble.

Check out this LA Times story on how the bond was put together -- or, more accurately, it became a Christmas tree of political goodies that more than doubled in size in the next two weeks. There is actually no plan at all for $2 billion of the $7 billion; they'll just use it to fund what they like. That's dangerous. The real question is why the school district, which has been unable to provide accurate checks to its teachers, thinks it deserves another blank check. Other questions is this really a good time to borrow? And why do we need more borrowing now, with enrollment flat and headed south? It would be better for the board to reconsider, pull this measure from the ballot before it is defeated, and try to come up with a reasonable, fiscally responsible plan for the district.

Former California Gov. Pete Wilson said at a conference Monday that state voters should be presented with a ballot measure that would "depoliticize" the administration of justice. He wants judges to ignore questionnaires and other attempts by interest groups to elicit their views. The former governor, who's also a lawyer, suggests a constitutional amendment that would read, in part:

"Judicial candidates are urged by...the constitution of the state of California to consciously forebear from exercising their right of free speech by refraining to answer any question...which seeks to elicit their views."

Payday lenders in Ohio, who want to reverse a new state law regulating imposing a 28 percent limit on the interest they may charge, have finally received the go-ahead to collect signatures on a referendum. But the state attorney general is warning that if the referendum should pass, discrepancies between the petition and the law could cause legal confusion. In fact, it appears that if the payday measure passes, two different numerical limits on the interest in such loans would be enshrined in state law.

Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, says she thinks marriage is man-woman but that the ballot measure, which -- like its counterpart in California -- would add a same-sex marriage ban to the state constitution, is unnecessary. 

In the final hours of its session, the Arizona legislature voted to put a measure on the November ballot that would ban gay marriage. Californians will vote on a similar initiative. The Arizona's measures prospects are considered poor, however; the state already voted down a measure that would have banned gay marriage two years ago. (That measure was harsher, though--it would have banned the state and local governments from offering domestic partnership benefits).

Here's my piece from today's Los Angeles Times on the idea of borrowing against future lottery revenues. (Gov. Schwarzenegger and the Assembly both have proposed doing it).