Restricting Initiatives

Fox and Rosenfield are not alone in thinking that many current legislative proposals dealing with the initiative process are designed to “reform” that process right out of meaningful existence.

Along with proposals to increase the signature requirement for ballot qualification for initiatives and to link their adoption to the turnout of voters, they might also have mentioned a “reform” aimed squarely at Los Angeles and other populous counties. This change would limit to 10% of the total required share of signatures which could be counted from any one county to qualify an initiative.

Fox and Rosenfield call for measures that would actually improve, not restrict the initiative process, including adoption of an indirect initiative procedure. The League of Women Voters of California has advocated the indirect initiative ever since our members completed a comprehensive study of the initiative and referendum in 1984. We think voters should have the option of taking their initiative proposal straight to the Legislature, with fewer signatures than now required for a direct initiative. The Legislature would then have to act upon the proposal. If it’s a statue and the Legislature approves it, the initiative would become law without the need for a ballot campaign. If it’s a constitutional amendment, the initiative turned down by the Legislature would go on the ballot.

The state Constitution must be amended to give voters this optional indirect initiative. Unfortunately, the necessary two-thirds of legislators have yet to be persuaded to put an amendment on the ballot.

Another measure to improve the process has fared better to date, winning approval by the Assembly and two Senate committees. By requiring an impartial review of initiatives before they are circulated for signatures, it would go a long way toward removing the flaws in measures that now lead to protracted litigation and disenchanted voters. The review would cover form, clarity of language and possible legal problems.

It’s certainly vital, as Fox and Rosenfield write, that Californians oppose those measures which seem to save the right to the initiative by destroying it. It’s equally vital, if the legacy of our progressive reformers is to be preserved, that we actively support those proposals which will make the initiative work as those reformers intended.

BETTY TROTTER, League of Women Voters of California, Consultant on Initiative and Referendum