When You Have Initiatives on the Ballot, Who Needs Politicians?

Charisma. Coattails. Candidates?

No.

Initiatives?

Perhaps.

If polls and voter responsiveness are any indication, issues are assum ing more and more importance to Californians than any politician.

A recent Orange County poll illustrates the change. Conducted by UC Irvine’s Mark Baldasarre, it showed “solid” voter support for Proposition 184, the “three strikes and you’re out” measure, and Proposition 187, the initiative that would “save” California from illegal immigrants.

In effect, whether or not Proposition 184 passes is almost irrelevant: the mere threat of its appearance on the November ballot was enough to put “three strikes” on the law books. Still, it serves as an index of voter frustration with government’s response to crime. Its continued strong showing in opinion polls--the most recent Los Angeles Times Poll has 184 leading 59% to 29%--tells candidates that voters will brook no backsliding.

Proposition 187 is a classic message initiative. Even supporters acknowledge its dubious constitutionality, but they contend that its passage “will send a strong message that California will no longer tolerate the dereliction of the duty of our politicians (to control the borders).”

The problems these two initiatives purport to solve are driving the election. Gov. Pete Wilson, who has rebounded dramatically to lead Kathleen Brown in The Times poll, has built his reelection campaign around the themes of crime and immigration. U.S. Senate hopeful Mike Huffington launched his candidacy, in part, by embracing--and funding--the “three strikes” initiative drive.

What’s most interesting about the Orange County results is that despite their best efforts to identify themselves with these anti-crime and anti-immigrant proposals, the poll shows “only tepid support” for Wilson and Huffington as candidates in a county crucial to Republican electoral fortunes.

Why?

Politicians, from President Bill Clinton on down, are strikingly unpopular in public-opinion polls. Across the country, voter disapproval appears to have broadened to include challengers as well as incumbents. A system seen as going sour taints anyone who touches it.

Initiatives allow frustrated voters to wrest control of policy making from the suspect--and unresponsive--politicians who run the system. Indeed, they are a way to shove politicians completely out of the policy process. As a result, issues--always a significant voting cue in California--are increasingly the rallying point, not the politicians. Voters appear to have just about given up caring about candidate elections on any other basis.

Clearly, Californians weren’t motivated by the candidate races last June. Might there have been a connection between the abysmally low turnout and the lack of grabber propositions on the ballot?

History shows that voters can be motivated by hot-button initiatives. And which voters turn out can influence the outcome of other races on the ballot.

Conventional wisdom has it that this season’s message initiatives are more likely to bring out conservatives and Republicans angered by crime and illegal immigration. But history, again, reminds us that an initiative’s coattails don’t always work as expected.

In 1982, liberal groups qualified a gun-control initiative for the November ballot in the hopes of bringing out more Democrats. But it was turnout in rural counties that rose, and these voters went against gun control--and for conservative candidates. That helped Republican George Deukmejian eke out a narrow victory over Democrat Tom Bradley in the governor’s race.

Proposition 184 is unlikely to play any such role because its provisions are already state law. But an ugly debate over 187 could flush out voters on both sides of the immigration fight.

If the debate remains relatively responsible, Wilson, who has indicated he’s inclined to support 187, will benefit. But if the fight explodes into a hate campaign, Wilson could find himself caught in the cross-fire.

On immigration, Brown is in a tight spot. Opposition to Proposition 187, particularly among Democrats and liberals, does not now appear to be deep enough or intense enough to motivate large numbers of them to vote. Should Brown turn up her anti-187 volume to energize them? Or should she abandon them and try harder to court anti-immigrant Republicans, conservatives and independents who support 187 and are more likely to vote anyway?

Wilson’s stand appeals to these voters; but Republicans and conservatives, at least, are already in his corner, even if grudgingly. If the governor ratchets up his rhetoric to energize the right, he risks losing the moderate middle to his Democratic challenger. And a perception of fear-mongering could galvanize Democratic liberals to vote against 187--and for Brown. Could this be enough for Brown to piece together a victory?

In any case, whoever won would face the challenge of cobbling together a governing majority united only by anger and frustration.

The results of November’s election could indicate whether voters are really ready to take the initiative and simply walk out on politicians. But if politicians are made irrelevant, who implements public policy?

Or perhaps the ultimate objective of voter abandonment is the demise of truly public policy.