"Direct Democracy" and Proposition 8

[MicaelS]

The passage of Prop 8 proves that "Direct Democracy" is often a bad idea. It often bites people square in the ass. I see many people on DU advocating for it. "Let the people decide!" is the constant refrain. And yet here we clear evidence just how fallible things can be. The Founders with all their faults proved that a Republic and a Representative form of government works best. And I sure as hell don't want any Commonwealth. Frankly, I don't trust many of my fellow voters, and not just on the right. I don't trust leftists when they advocate Prohibition of Guns, Porn, Tobacco, Alcohol or many other decisions on the grounds "it might save one life."

So the next time you cry for "Direct Democracy" remember the lesson of Proposition 8 and the fact it might be YOUR Freedoms that get voted away next.

[brendan120678]

1. Well said...

Direct Democracy is never what the Founding Fathers intended.
It just doesn't work as well as many people envision it working.

[rucky]

2. Tyrrany of the majority.

[crispini]

3. The problem is not with I&R

the problem is with PAID petition gatherers funded by HEAPS of money from out of state.

Easy way to fix I&R: Petition gatherers may not be paid by signature but have to be paid by the hour (or perhaps, require them to be volunteers). I&R was never meant to be perverted by the wealthy who could afford to bankroll a signature effort.

[SoCalNative]

5. Exactly!

let them be volunteers of the organizations attempting to get measures on the ballot or no signature gathering.

[MicaelS]

11. I "vote" for volunteers

If there aren't enough people willing to get out and work the streets to get something on the ballot, then that's a pretty good indicator that the initiative is a bad idea.

[Ichingcarpenter]

16. So you are saying that proposition 8 was a good idea since they had "volunteers'?

'If there aren't enough people willing to get out and work the streets to get something on the ballot, then that's a pretty good indicator that the initiative is a bad idea."

You are pretty naive if you think that's how its done.

[MicaelS]

19. Prop 8 was a bad idea across the board.

I don't support anything about it one damn bit. I don't like the idea of ANYONE getting paid to get people to sign to have an initiative placed on a ballot.

[Starry Messenger]

21. Should we make it illegal? eom

[MicaelS]

23. Should we make what illegal? n/t

[Starry Messenger]

25. Allowing people to get paid to sign people up to put things on ballots. n/t

[MicaelS]

26. I really don't know,

I would have to give it some serious thought. I hate like hell outlawing things. Since you are from California what is your perspective on whole process? Got any websites to read?

[Starry Messenger]

27. I think this is the first time the process was used to eliminate a right.

We're still reeling and trying to get this one struck down. I'm sure/hoping we will see some reform on this issue in a variety of areas. My big peeve right now is all the religions that signed on from out of state to get this abomination passed.

[ContinentalOp]

30. We need to require way more signatures too.

Aren't the signature levels really old? I seem to remember people talking about this during the Davis recall.

There should also be a 2/3rds majority required to amend the constitution.

[rhett o rick]

37. Don't understand your argument. There is a problem with I&R as you aptly described. nm

[crispini]

39. The OP is advocating getting rid of I&R altogether.

I argue that it is a useful mechanism for the people to bypass an uncooperative government, IF it does in fact come from "the people" and is not perverted by rich fatcats who manipulate the process with their money.

[rhett o rick]

40. What I heard the OP as saying is that direct democracy is dangerous. I agree. The founding fathers

built in safeguards against knee-jerky direct democracy. I think that is best. However, I will qualify it to say it should be that way if our representative government was working as intended. However, I acknowledge that it isn't. I & R's have their problems and a good court system would weed out the bad schtuff. However, with our broken system, we no longer can count on the courts. I feel the HOR branch also isn't performing as intended. It was intended to represent the common people which should make up its member. But the members are all rich and are hard to unseat.

So what I guess I am trying to say is that our founding fathers didn't want a direct democracy but under current circumstances it might not be so bad.

[Starry Messenger]

4. Leftists. Interesting. n/t

[Ichingcarpenter]

9. Leftists. Interesting

Prohibition of things that are bad for you, which is a conservative talking point
and intellectually dishonest. What liberal is asking for the prohibition of alcohol, guns or porn?


How about regulation of things that are bad for you? Conservatives have outlawed ten times
more things than liberals have. Marijuana, prostitution, gay marriage and abortion just to
name a few.

[Starry Messenger]

12. Exactly.

I only see the use of the word "leftists" on FR. I was surprised to see its use here. Also surprised to see someone use the issue of human rights to push a partisan talking point.

[MicaelS]

17. No freepper here, I'm a Democrat and Populist

Quite trying to read between the lines and read WTF I wrote. What other term do you suggest I use? Not everyone here is a Progressive, or a Liberal.

How about this: I don't trust ANYONE when they advocate Prohibition of Guns, Porn, Tobacco, Alcohol or many other THINGS on the grounds "it might save one life."

[Starry Messenger]

24. I use "voter". nt

[Ichingcarpenter]

29. "Not everyone here is a Progressive, or a Liberal."

Well you are on a liberal and progressive site and we welcome your
non-liberal and non-progressive insight.


Ballot initiatives in many states allowed women to vote for the first time
which would have never been past by their state's legislature.

Ballot initiatives are a two edge sword and I agree some reform
needs to be done in order to 'regulate' the process.

T. Boone Pickens was able to get his on because of his money and it failed.

[Bluenorthwest]

36. If you really care to look

there are also plenty of people here advocating gun rights. I think they have a whole forum. So, in short I'd say you misunderstand how the divide on gun issues tends to work, as do most. I lived in a big city. Lots of people against all guns. Now I live in an area with a large rural thing going on. Don't know a single 'leftist' who is against guns. In fact, they tend to be packing.
Never in my life have I heard anyone but a relgious loon speak of alcohol prohibition. Not one person from any political position. Lots of people hate smoking. So lumping those controls onto the 'leftists' is funny. You think Mormons and Baptists vote to keep the cigs aflame? That's the right in on that one too.
Porn...a conversation from a decade ago. Never hear a word about it, except of course from the rightists, particularly the relious right again.
Other things the right attacks and the left defend include: my human rights, medical marijuana, and an end to discriminatory minimum sentances for non violent offenders ie poor kids with pot. We try to end victimless crimes, and the Right shouts racist epithets and demands more prisons.

Not saying you and I disagree, save on this: the right is always dedicated to retrictions on personal liberties that do not relate to the business dealings of their elite. Always. When they speak of freedom, they mean the freedom to steal, not the freedom to grow a crop or marry your loved one. Or make your own medical decisions.
You are among Democrats for a reason, and I assume that reason is because among the 'rightists' your views are seen as liberal and progressive too often. Because they are, you just don't like to think all Mavericky about your bad self, cain't be defined no sir! Well stroll around DU and note that many here have your exact views on guns and most have a love for a press so free it includes porn, most here are half drunk or stoned, heavily smoking and trying to get hitched to someone society does not like.
The nanny statists are actually on the Right, reaching into your pants and your body....but you can pretend to be a 'liberatarian' if you want. Some of us pretend to be Jedi Knights and other imaginary things too!

[MicaelS]

14. Are you joking?

Plenty of people right here on this website think guns should be severely restricted or banned. They start talking crap about "assault weapons" and have not the first fucking clue about guns. They're like virgins lecturing sexually active people about sex.

Since calling out people is prohibited, quite a few rant and rave a porn on occasion and the "affect" on women.

And who gets to decide what is bad for ME? And why? Plenty of authoritarians on both the left and right want to ban things on the grounds it's "bad for you".

And BTW, I think cannabis, prostitution, guns, alcohol, tobacco, gay marriage, abortion, porn just to name a few, should all be legal. I'm sick and fucking tired of people trying to stick their noses into other folks business on the grounds of "doing good".

As the evil Union redleg Officer said in the Outlaw Josey Wales; "Doing good ain't got no end."

[Ichingcarpenter]

18. Legal doesn't mean its not regulated

Your Libertarian viewpoint is noted

[MicaelS]

22. Did I use the word "unregulated" at any point?

No I did not, and your authoritarian viewpoint is likewise noted.

[HamdenRice]

6. Originally direct democracy was enacted to get past the lobbyists and corrupt politicians

It was not part of the original system, but in the l800s, many state legislatures were bought and paid for by the railroads and other corporate giants. The referendum was a way to bypass corrupt legislatures.

[jmg257]

7. Basic rights are ALWAYS supposed to be secured, especially from an over-reaching majority.

"Direct democracy" should never be an issue with regards to ANY in/unalienable rights. Like all good governments, our govt was formed and limited as it was by the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights added, for one primary reason - to better secure our rights - equal rights for all the people. Allowing those rights to be decided by the whim (or bigotry or ignorance) of a majority is ridiculous. As Prop 8 clearly shows.

"Wherever the real power in a government lies, there is the danger of oppression. In our Governments the real power lies in the majority of the Community, and the invasion of private rights is chiefly to be apprehended, not from acts of Government contrary to the sense of its constituents, but from acts in which the Government is the mere instrument of the major number of the Constituents"

Madison to Jefferson, 1788

[LatteLibertine]

13. Good post

nt

[bemildred]

8. You know, autocrats and oligarchies don't have such a good record either.

When the people rule, they have to be trained and educated for the job, just like a king or a bureacrat. If you don't do that, the results can vary.

[Moochy]

10. It's Mob Rule

There seem to be no limits to the kinds of lies that the ballot measure backers can run in their advertisements.

When it's legal to simply lie on the public airwaves ballot measures are not a fair process.

The general public are not legislators. The propositions are often intentionally confusing. Most of these propositions are put forward by groups that can't get legislators to introduce or sponsor their issues.

[TahitiNut]

15. Henry Steele Commager's "Majority Rule and Minority Rights" addresses the issue.

Written in 1943 and based on Commager's lectures, it's the most seminal work on this conflict I've found. Out of print, one might find a copy at a well-stocked library. (Alternatively, one might earn my trust and borrow my copy.)

[davepc]

20. Ballot initiatives are mob rule. Let Representatives do their jobs.

[Retrograde]

28. that's why I usually vote against them

When I first moved to California in the 70s I thought they were a neat idea, a holdover from the heyday of populism. But over the years I've seen too many that were driven by groups with their own particular axes to grind with little or no consideration as to what effects they'll have long term. Many are well-intended (remember Prop. 65? term limits?) but they're rarely the great benefits they're supposed to be.

So now I refuse to sign ballot petitions, and generally vote no on the grounds that we need to make the state legislature do their jobs. Legroom for chickens? Alternative energy sources? Great ideas - let the legislature enact the appropriate regulations. The legislature's a bunch of bureaucrats who do nothing except get in the way? Vote them out! (I did vote for the high-speed rail and redistricting propositions this time, though).

[MicaelS]

31. Good post, thank you. n/t

[Freddie Stubbs]

32. Everyone like the concept of Democracy until the majority takes a position they don't like

[cherokeeprogressive]

34. Isn't THAT the truth.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our fourth quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[suston96]

35. One of the Founding Fathers on direct democracy......

The people do not want (lack) virtue but they are often the dupes of pretended patriots.

Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts - 1787

[Lyric]

41. Ahh, Gerry.

Of "Gerrymandering" fame.

He had a good point there, though.

[rhett o rick]

38. Good post. Our government needs built in methods of slowing down knee-jerk

reactions. A buffer, if you will, to keep people from over reacting.