|
Contributor
Ray
Haynes
Mr.
Haynes is an Assembly member representing Riverside and
Temecula.
He serves on the Appropriations and Budget Committees. [go to
Assembly Member Haynes
website at California Assembly][go to Haynes index]
Attack
Of The Propositions!!!
More and more initiatives…
[Ray
Haynes] 10/12/04
Are you ready
to do your homework, California?
You are probably aware that next month you are being asked again
to play some small role in helping to choose the leader of the
free world for the next four years.
But many of you still
may not realize that you are also going to have to make decisions
on 16 different ballot initiatives, which
will have a major impact for years to come on our state’s
budget, business climate, and even our electoral system, to name
just a few areas covered in this election. The list this year is
as confusing and complicated as ever, and includes issues as diverse
as bonds for stem cell research, tort reform, higher income taxes
for mental health programs, and a referendum on a law that would
mandate employer-provided health insurance that was passed by the
legislature and signed by our recently recalled Governor. It also
features two dueling casino initiatives, two very similar local
government measures, and two competing propositions dealing with
California’s elections.
I’m very conflicted by this whole system. On the one hand,
our Founding Fathers were rightfully concerned by the concept of
direct democracy, which they felt would inevitably devolve to mob
rule and “tyranny of the majority”. The checks and
balances in our system were specifically established to make it
more difficult for laws to be passed in haste or based on the passions
of the moment. Our elected representatives are supposed to be in
place to examine legislative proposals carefully, consider testimony
from all sides, worry about unintended consequences, and to identify
and fix problems in legislation in a way that just isn’t
possible when an issue is put directly before the voters. In fact,
one of the biggest concerns with the initiative process is that
once an initiative is passed, the only way to correct errors we
discover later is to go back to the voters with it again.
Unfortunately, our
legislative representatives have not been very representative
lately. If you look at the results of the recall
last year and at how the voters of our state have voted on initiatives
over the past decade, it is clear that the legislative majority
is not pursuing an agenda consistent with what the voters want.
On issues like gay marriage, affirmative action, bilingual education
and illegal immigration, the legislature has continued to pursue
policies at odds with the voters even after they have spoken en
masse through the initiative process. It is clear that the people
can’t wait for the legislature to do their bidding and must
occasionally take matters into their own hand.
That is what they did
last fall when the recall was qualified—they
took the process back from the politicians. Furthermore, in the
face of a referendum that was going to qualify to repeal the new
illegal alien drivers’ license bill, the legislature itself
stampeded back into session to kill it themselves. The workers’ compensation
reforms we got passed in the legislature this Spring were also
in direct response to an initiative that our state’s employers
had gathered signatures for. Without that threat, there would not
have been the progress we made on that issue.
But when the threats
don’t work, we wind up with sometimes
complicated, sometimes poorly written, sometimes overly broad,
sometimes unconstitutional measures put directly before the voters.
And the voters are faced with an all-or-nothing choice. Do they
support a flawed initiative in order to make some progress on an
issue the legislature refuses to address? Or do they vote “no” and
come away with nothing?
This November’s slate is as complicated as any I can remember,
and the dueling initiatives are sure to sow confusion amongst the
voters. Which local government initiative is the right one? Which
Indian gaming initiative is the right one? Which election reform
initiative is the right one? What if the correct answer is “none
of the above”? My philosophy on the floor of the legislature
tends to be “when in doubt, vote no,” and I recommend
it on the ballot, too. The damage of doing nothing is usually less
than the damage caused by doing something wrong. Usually.
There are a few initiatives
I think are worthwhile, such as Proposition 64, that is trying
to eliminate some of the frivolous lawsuits
against our state’s employers. But the purpose of this editorial
is not to tell you how to vote on all the initiatives. My point
is that all of these initiatives can have serious long-term impacts
on our state, and all will require actual thought and effort from
our state’s voters. If we rely on misleading and dishonest
30-second political commercials from either side of the debate
for our information, we will all be very poorly served. So I ask
again---are you ready to do your homework, California? CRO
§
|