"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; Indeed, It's the only thing that ever has." Dr. Margaret Mead.

• Home
• Myths
• Links
• Legal
• Editorials
• J.A.I.L.

Myths

MYTH: INITIATIVES ARE A TOOL OF SPECIAL INTERESTS

FALSE.

The standard for comparison should be the legislative process. Special interests influence the Legislature. Is the Initiative process influenced more by special interests than the Legislature is? Why do moneyed interests so aggressively take sides on initiatives? Why do special interests of all kinds band together with politicians of all philosophies to attack the initiative process? The answer could be that the Initiative power placed in the hands of the people would be a threat to those who control political power. Special interest groups fear the Initiative process because it is a mechanism for expressing the public will.

MYTH: INITIATIVE CAMPAIGNS ARE INFLUENCED BY MONEY

TRUE-BUT-ARE THEY LESS INFLUENCED BY MONEY THAN THE LEGISLATURE IS INFLUENCED BY MONEY?

The real question of whether initiatives are influenced by money should be; "How"? and "in relation to what"? Does it cost the special interest groups more or less money to stop these proposals in the Legislature? The obvious answer is "less". Therefore, the initiative process is clearly less corrupted by money than the legislative process. The more difficult question to answer is "how much less corrupted"? There are certain issues that will always pass, while others will always fail. There seems to be no connection between the amount of money spent and the outcome. In these cases, there is no evidence that big money helps to pass citizen legislation.

MYTH: THE VOTERS ARE INCOMPETENT TO DECIDE COMPLEX ISSUES?

FALSE: THIS IS AN ALARMIST STATEMENT DESIGNED TO PERPETUATE DEPENDENCY.

"The judgment of the American people is extraordinarily sound. The public is always ahead of its leaders." said George Gallup Sr. in 1984 after 50 years in the public opinion polling business.

Although there was discussion of recall during the drafting of the U.S. Constitution in 1778, the formalized petition structure of Initiative and Referendum were unknown to the Framers. However, there can be little doubt of what their positions might have been. Thomas Jefferson said, "I know of no safe repository of the ultimate power of society but the people, and if we think them not enlightened enough, the remedy is not to take the power from them, but to inform them."

Thomas Paine was more extreme and believed that the source of innovative public policy was the people, not the rulers.

In 1975, the Swedish government decided to involve the voters in determining it's national energy policy. It was hoped that 10,000 citizens would avail themselves of a 10 hour course on energy. Shockingly, 80,000 attended. This turnout is equivilient to 2.000,000 Americans or 75,000 Delawarians. People are responsible. They go out of their way to become informed. They share their information and conclusions with others, so it is not necessarily accurate to suggest that 75,000 Delawarians would generate a less desirable policy on any issue than the 64 state legislators who must dispose of over 500 bills in 180 days, all while under the pressure of lobbyists and special interest groups.

Studies show people's knowledge of issues and candidates is amazingly similar to their voting practices. In other words, voters appear to be m ore informed abut issues than they are about candidates. The notion that voters are incompetent to vote on issues suggests that they are also incompetent to vote for candidates. Such a notion is contrary to fundamental democratic principles.

Further, the fact that not all voters vote on all issues supports the "responsible voter" premise. In her 1987 book, "Money, Media and Grass Roots," Betty H. Zisk contradicts the conventional wisdom, "long ballots do not seem to cause consistent patterns of either negative voting or a drop in participation at the end of the ballot. Nor do difficult propositions, in substance or wording, invariably evoke negative reactions."

Many scholars now support the "pick and choose" theory. On a long ballot, voters skip the issues they do not feel informed about, and vote on the ones they do, regardless of ballot placement.

But, there is a more important reason that the people should participate in lawmaking; when the citizens pass final judgment on the laws under which they live, regulations make us more free because laws then support behavior that citizens deem desirable. Conversely, when laws are passed exclusively by government, regulations make us more oppressed because these laws advance interests of the few, the government and its special interest lobbies, at the expense of the common good.

MYTH: INITIATIVES ARE POORLY WRITTEN

FALSE

Compared to bills that move through the legislature, initiatives are no worse, and sometimes better. Initiatives, in those 23 states where I/R is practiced, are, in the final analysis, approved by the office of legal services and the Attorney Generals specialist, even before petitions are created. The arduous task of getting on the ballot, the normal prospect of being substantially outspent in the campaign, the risk that any flaw is ammunition for the opposition, and the inevitability of court challenges upon passage, provide important incentives for proponents to be both careful and reasonable in drafting their measures. In most I&R states the petition sponsors use the same professional bill writers who help elected lawmakers draft legislation.

MYTH: INITIATIVES ARE OFTEN UNCONSTITUTIONAL

FALSE

Statistics show less than 2% are deemed by the Court to be unconstitutional. Proposals over the years, rejected by the voters may have been unconstitutional. The voters rejection of these measures is another sign of the voters good judgment.

MYTH: INITIATIVES CAUSE BALLOT CLUTTER

SO WHAT!

What if Initiatives cause cluttered ballots? It is the people's government and it is their ballot. There would be less clutter if there were no initiatives. There would be less clutter if there were no referred measures. There would be less clutter if there were no issues to be voted on. If we carry this to it's extreme, the cleanest ballot of all would be one with no candidates to vote for---simply a blank piece of paper.

Pre-marked ballots would also be easy for voters. Though voters may complain about deciding hard issues, most understand that participation in government is their civic duty in a democracy and they exercise it responsibly. Further, it is the people's right and responsibility to control their destinies. If it requires lots of citizen action to achieve the proper level of responsible freedom and appropriate reforms, so be it.

Also, voters do not cause ballot overload (a phrase used by special interests and political insiders). Even in California, equivalent to 6 states in size, the majority of initiatives are introduced by elected officials.

MYTH: VOTERS DO NOT LIKE LONG BALLOTS

FALSE

The data suggests the opposite. In a 1977 poll, voters were asked, "would you be more inclined or less inclined to go to vote if you could vote on issues as well as candidates?". 74% said "more", 7% Said "less", and 13% said " no difference". Further, voter turn-out in initiative states and non-initiative states in 1976, 1978, 1980, 1982, and 1984 showed initiative state turn-out 4.4% higher in initiative states. Voter turn-out is higher when initiatives ore on the ballot in both presidential election and non-presidential election years. Voter turn-out drops sharply when no issues appear on the ballot. When initiatives are on the ballot, voter turn-out is generally about 10% higher. The more issues on the ballot the higher the voter turn-out.

MYTH: INITIATIVES BENEFIT ONE PHILOSOPHY

FALSE: A SPECIAL INTEREST POSITION DESIGNED TO MAINTAIN THE STATUS-QUO

This is a claim used to divide the people so that those with power can maintain control. Claims that the initiative has worked for the benefit of only one political philosophy or one group of people simply are not accurate, observes a 1980 study of the Colorado initiative process, funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities.

This is how it works; Initiative opponents list examples of initiatives offensive to the left or the right and depending on the audience they illustrate the appearance of the abuse of the process. This way, they trick people into voting away their petition rights as a false protection against a non-existent threat from so-called extremists. To the extent that initiatives benefit one philosophy, that one philosophy should be the will of the general public.

MYTH: PEOPLE VOTE SELFISHLY

FALSE: SUBJECTIVE ALARMIST STATEMENT

This is an alarmist statement designed to instill fear. It is another version of "the people cannot be trusted." Its meaning must be clear. First; assume that selfish means that the people will lower their taxes. Although they have the right to do so, because it is their money, voters have been very discrete and discriminating in choosing which tax initiatives to pass. Between 1978 and 1984, for example, only 3 of 19 tax cut initiatives passed. In Colorado, tax limitation was on the ballot 9 times over a 26 year period before it finally passed in 1992.

Selfish cannot mean that the majority would discriminate against minorities, because each individual enjoys constitutional protection. Besides, the general public is predisposed to a sense of fairness.

MYTH: MANY INITIATIVES ARE BAD IDEAS

FALSE: MANY? SOME? WHICH ONES? SAYS WHO?

The check against bad ideas is the vote of the people, currently not available in Delaware. Previously failed initiatives became good ideas when the realization that issues would not be addressed by politicians became obvious.

Even people with bad ideas have First Amendment petition rights. To suggest that the initiative would be restricted or killed because some foolish citizen might someday introduce a bad ballot proposal is an expression of elitism and distrust of the public. Such thinking is unsuited for a free people Generally, bad ideas cannot muster the support needed to get on the ballot, and when they do, they are seldom approved. Skeptics are invited to make a list of those that are bad from all the citizen initiated amendments passed to date in the country!

MYTHS: INITIATIVES PLACE EXTRANEOUS MATERIAL IN THE CONSTITUTION

FALSE: ANOTHER DIVERSION BY THE SPECIAL INTERESTS

Two thirds of all amendments, in those states that practice their First Amendment rights, are originated by the legislature, not the citizens. In Delaware, it is worse, 100%, because the citizens here are not allowed to even vote on amendments to their own constitution. That gives Delaware the embarrassing distinction of being the ONLY state in the United States of America and its territories whose Legislature ignores its citizen input. For the last 20 years bills to correct this injustice have been introduced. The bills never make it out of committee. Advisory initiatives, those non-binding on the legislature, and Referendum, was passed in Delaware in 1906 and has been referred to the citizens once; the subject, bingo. The citizens of Delaware are effectively shut out of the process of Democracy until they "wake up."

MYTH: INITIATIVES CREATE TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY

FALSE

Denying our 1st Amendment Right would be more accurately described as oppressive and tyrannical. To apply such a label to lawmaking by popular vote, where fundamental rights are protected by the U.S. and Delaware Constitutions, is absurd. It is a play on words that is designed to elicit an emotional response. The implication, by those threatened by direct democracy, is "mob" and "majority" is the same. Those who make such claims are those whose power is threatened by determining the popular will; politicians, political parties, lobbyists and special interests.

MYTH: INITIATIVES MAKE THE LEGISLATURE UNNECESSARY. IT WOULD UNDERMINE OUR REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT BY INTERFERING WITH THE RIGHTS OF ELECTED OFFICIALS.

FALSE

Legislatures are no less necessary, but their role is reshaped. The initiative helps the legislative process by providing a mechanism to deal with issues that the legislature often will not approach; conflict of interest issues, issues of principle and issues of controversy. The key to public policy success is enlisting the wisdom and resources of the people, not shutting them out. Again, "I know of no safe repository of the ultimate power of society but the people, and if we think them not enlightened enough, the remedy is not to take the power from them, but to inform them."

The number of initiatives rarely reaches 1% of the number of bills considered in a legislature. Use of the initiative increases when the legislative process is broken, as it is in Delaware. Therefore, high use of initiatives merely means that legislative reform is needed.

Further, initiative and referendum no way usurps the legitimate delegated powers of government since the duties of lawmakers remain exactly the same as before. The process simply adds a way for voters and ethical lawmakers to take the desperately needed action that politicians have refused to address. Used intelligently, in fact, I & R complements and strengthens the legislative process. The I&R mechanism gives representatives a clear indication of constituent's views on major issues, making it possible for elected lawmakers to more effectively represent those interests. When you factor in the fact that advisory (non-binding) legislation was passed in 1906 and the Legislature referred a "bingo" measure to the ballot as the only referred measure to date one must ask the hard question, Is Delaware politics democratic?

MYTH: MAKING LAWS IS THE JOB OF THE LEGISLATORS

YES....BUT....

No matter how good a legislative body is, there are some issues that are very difficult, perhaps impossible, for the legislative body to objectively address. It would actually be unnatural, and unreasonable for citizens to expect elected officials to act against their own self interest, limit their power of influence and discount the influence of special interest lobbies. Thus, to have a more rational, functional and accountable Democratic government, I&R is a necessity. I & R creates a mechanism to around the Legislature when they have a conflict of interest dealing with a particular issue. As the foundation of all the 1st Amendment Rights, I & R absence in the Democratic process in Delaware will therefore continue to perpetuate the abuses of power practiced in Delaware.

CONCLUSION

Examination of the false arguments, accusations and myths against the Initiative process finds none of them very persuasive. Special interests do not thrive on the initiative, they find the arrogant, self absorbed legislature far easier to manage. Money-power, likewise, gets it's way far more readily under the Capitol dome in Dover, not at the ballot box.

These false arguments, assumptions, myths, and tactics are used by those in power to throw these and other false arguments out to confuse a naive, disorganized and ill informed citizenry.

Voters are not incompetent to decide complex issues, as quantitative research has proved. Nor are ballot measures notable less well drafted than legislative bills. Constitutional invalidation of successful initiatives is not frequent, but very rare.

What little ballot clutter there is actually results m ore from legislative referendum not from initiated measures by the people, and voters themselves do not seem to dislike a longer ballot. In fact, turn-out statistics seem to suggest the opposite. Denying full participation in the Democratic process stifles voter turnout.

The Initiative does not benefit merely the political right or left. Partisans from both sides have used it over the years . Bad ideas do not often muster the petition drive support to make the ballot, and they win at the polls even less often. Lengthy constitutional provisions are not primarily the result of initiatives, but stem from the inherent nature of a state constitution, as amended mostly by legislative referenda. In Delaware, the people have no voice in changes to their own Constitution!

Finally, the initiative does not imply a tyranny of the majority. The U.S. Constitution prevents that. Nor does the Initiative threaten to make the legislature unnecessary, rather it supports that institution by enlisting the people to counter-balance legislative overreach and to compensate for legislative weaknesses.

Legislators who line up with "We the People," and with truth, will be our future leaders.