I hope Prop 8 has opened some California eyes

[SoCalDem]

Initiatives and propositions "dumped" onto state ballots are dangerous..

ANY RICH PERSON, ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD CAN DUMP A SHIT-LOAD OF MONEY INTO OUR "SYSTEM" AND CHANGE OUR LAWS.

Imagine that it's 1964, instead of 2008..and the KKK was pushing their agenda, instead of the Mormons..

Every state pays legislators, we pay for the upkeep of the buildings, we pay their salaries, we pay for their familie's health care, and all we expect them to do , is to legislate.

They do not WANT any "hot potato" issues, so they back off, and allow those divisive issues to flood into our balloting system..

It's how we ended up with the Goober-nator...It's why newer Californians pay 5-6 times higher property taxes than us old-timers.. It's why rich & famous people "have their way" with laws they like..

Initiatives are ALWAYS.... YES-NO... and in every case, each side has no real opportunity to argue their point, or to even debate.. They must do their talking with even bigger quantities of cash..

If we keep initiatives, why do we even NEED legislatures? If they are to be little more than "pets" who occasionally lick our hands & wag their tails when they need money, and shy away from doing their jobs, why do we even need them?

Divisive initiatives' main purpose is NOT to actually get the laws changed (many, if not most eventually get overturned by courts, after expenditures of even more shit-loads of cash)... they are inserted, gleefully into elections to rev up the "base"..(almost always republicans) so they turn out to vote in an election that they might otherwise have passed on completely.. (like this one)

School prayer
guns
abortion
gay issues
vouchers

these are just a few of the "usual suspects" that republicans just love to trot out of their "bloody shirt" drawer every election..

We need to OUTLAW initiatives..and if there is a need for legislation, it should be done through the normal channels..like the legislature.. Make the legislators go "on the record"..make them vote on difficult issues..make the governors accountable..

[GRLMGC]

1. It's too damn easy

I'll bet I could get enough signatures to get an initiative banning Republicans or something. It doesn't make it right.

[Maat]

2. Well, this law school graduate can see LAWS (statutes) being put on the ballot ...

BUT there is NO excuse for allowing the general populace to amend the Constitution, particularly with NO approval from the legislature!

I've got a feeling things are going to change because of this episode!

[varelse]

3. I think that a 3/4 majority should be required to pass an amendment

I do like our initiatives, but no amendment to the constitution should pass with a "simple" majority. It should be passed by 2/3 or 3/4 of the voters and then approved by the Supreme Court or ratified by our legislators.

[ColbertWatcher]

6. I agree. A Constitution should not be changed so capriciously. n/t

[dems_rightnow]

9. I agree with part of that

It should require more than a simple majority.

But once the people have spoken in some supermajority, the legislature and courts have no business "approving" their will or rejecting it.

[Maat]

10. Exactly (n/t)!

[Gormy Cuss]

4. The standard for making the ballot is too low

and I agree with you -- the voters shouldn't be asked to do the legislature's job on complex issues. Nonbinding referenda are more appropriate for most props. Prop. 8 is an abomination even among props.

[Newsjock]

5. Funny you should mention 1964

Because that is exactly what actually did happen in 1964:
http://www.iandrinstitute.org/California.htm

In the 1960s, California liberals soured on the initiative process as a result of two measures passed by voters in 1964. The first repealed the Rumford Fair Housing Act, which the legislature had passed, and Governor Brown had signed, in 1963. The second banned cable television. That measure was sponsored by theater owners who, fearing competition, advertised the initiative as guaranteeing "free television" and eliminating the specter of "pay television." Both 1964 initiatives were later overturned by the courts as unconstitutional.

[curse of greyface]

It's a nice thought but Vote no on 8 had more money.

The problem wasn't money. People pretending that it was are missing a "teaching moment"*


* see teaching moment a nice way of saying you're a dumb fuck without saying it. Hold on is this thing still transcribing....D'oh

[SoCalDem]

8. * "teaching moment" backatcha

:P

[Selatius]

7. The problem isn't propositions. The problem is allowing only 50% plus 1 to change the constitution.

Not even in Switzerland, which is famous for utilizing semi-direct democracy with the power of initiatives, referendums, and recalls could you alter the nation's constitution so easily. There, voters have a lot of direct input into how government works, but even they aren't given that kind of free reign over rewriting a fundamental document such as the constitution.