Bring Democracy Back to Initiative Process

You have seen them at the local supermarket, or at the movie theater. They are neighborhood volunteers gathering signatures to place a measure on the ballot.

It is the most basic form of democracy, and one divorced from any special interest--citizen involvement in government at its best. Or so you thought.

In fact, often they are not volunteers, but hired guns. Each is paid a dollar (or more) per signature and they will gather signatures for any cause--good, bad or indifferent.

They are not from your neighborhood. And they have been paid by a special interest that could not, perhaps for good reason, get its measure passed by the Legislature. It is not citizen involvement at its best, and it has become the rule, not the exception.

California’s initiative process was established in 1911, and during the first 60 years of its existence, the number of initiative petitions circulated during an election cycle rarely exceeded a dozen. Beginning in the early 1970s, however, the number of petitions circulated increased dramatically. Over the last 24 years, in fact, the number of initiatives eligible for circulation during each election cycle reached or exceeded 40 on four occasions, 30 on seven occasions and 20 on six occasions.

Last year alone, 45 initiatives were eligible for circulation. And these figures do not even include the hundreds of local measures circulated at the same time. The rise in the number of initiative petitions being circulated caused a mushrooming of the use of paid signature gatherers, otherwise known as “bounty hunters.”

What began as a cottage industry has now become big business. Today, nearly every drive to qualify an initiative for the ballot relies upon the use of bounty hunters.

And this is especially disturbing in light of the California secretary of state’s finding that the greatest source of fraud in the state’s election system has resulted from the use of bounty hunters to collect petition signatures and register voters.

In an effort to bring about reform of the initiative process, I introduced Senate Bill 1979, which would require state and local petitions being circulated for the purpose of placing an initiative or referendum on the ballot to carry a notice of potential signers informing them if the signature gatherer is being paid to collect signatures

More importantly, the bill would also require the petition to identify the financial sponsor of the signature drive. That way, voters will know before they sign a petition creatively labeled “Tough Statewide Smoking Legislation” that the proposition is really being sponsored by the tobacco lobby, or that another might be sponsored by the gun lobby, the doctors, the lawyers, the insurers or the bankers. Their sponsorship may make you more or less interested in signing, but you have the right to know who is really behind the initiative before you sign on the dotted line.

California’s election code already requires a general notice on every petition indicating that the petition may be circulated by either a paid signature gatherer or a volunteer.

Although voters can ask the signature gatherers whether they are receiving compensation for their efforts, it is difficult, if not impossible, to ensure that voters receive accurate information in these circumstances. Instead of relying upon the individual who receives compensation based on the number of signatures obtained to provide this key information, SB 1979 requires the paid status--and financial sponsor’s name, address and controlling committee--to appear on each and every petition.

The initiative process has been a vital and vibrant part of California’s constitutional structure since 1911. It has worked both miracles and mischief. But what began as a safety valve to allow voters to take measures into their own hands when the Legislature failed to act has been increasingly perverted by the excessive special interests, by the special interests, for the special interests. For a fee, any group with enough money can buy its place on the ballot.

These groups understand that if the voters really knew who was behind a given measure, they might refuse to sign. And not surprisingly, SB 1979 has encountered significant opposition. But SB 1979 is worthy of your support, and I hope you will let your legislators and our governor know that you want the facts before you sign. And then, just maybe, those people gathering signatures at the local markets will be your neighbors.