The risks and benefits of California’s direct democracy - OCRegister

susilangs.blogspot.com

California’s ballot measure system has provided a vital check on the state legislature’s big government ideology. The defeat of Prop. 15, which would have dramatically raised taxes on businesses, and the passage of Prop. 22, which keeps hundreds of thousands of contracting jobs legal, are great grassroots victories for economic freedom.

Yet at the end of this long proposition season, a brief look at the dangers of this direct democracy system is warranted.

Prop. 15’s outcome may amount to little more than a stay of tax execution. Tax-increase proponents will almost certainly be back with another referendum in 2022 to try their luck again. Given how close the results were this year, it seems like only a matter of time before they succeed. With unlimited at-bats, almost anyone can hit a home run.

It seems unfair that voters can reject several efforts to overturn Proposition 13’s tax protections, only to see them disappear from an especially well-funded or lucky ballot measure victory in the years to come. If voters pass a version of Prop. 15 in 2022, shouldn’t there be some sort of rubber match to determine whether the will of the voters is fleeting or lasting?

Proponents of the status quo would likely say that opponents are welcome to challenge a new tax in a future election with a ballot measure of their own. Yet is this whipsaw back-and-forth really the best way to govern?

“Majority rules,” cloaked in popular appeals for “democracy,” is a core tenet of the left’s governing philosophy. But should a simple majority be enough to tax away the property of a minority of Californians? Pure democracy is little more than two hungry sharks and a surfer deciding what to do in the water. At what point are individual rights to property and liberty more important than the will of the majority?

The Founders recognized the threat of pure democracy to foster populist passions and violate inalienable rights. As a result, they created a republic. They made changing the U.S. Constitution exceedingly difficult, requiring a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress or the support of three-quarters of state legislatures. Yet in California, the state constitution can change with just 50 percent plus one of the votes.

Even the “majority rules” justification for the ballot measure status quo fails on its own merits. Prop 15 received 7.7 million “Yes” votes and 8.3 million “No” votes. If it received the bare majority of votes needed to pass, that only represents 33 percent — just one-third! — of the state’s 25.1 million eligible voters. Majority rule in theory is almost always minority rule in practice.

This minority rule is especially problematic when you consider that a tiny number of government union bosses are initiating and funding many of these ballot efforts that infringe on Californians’ liberties. Two union giants, the California Teachers Association and the SEIU, spent a combined $30 million to try to pass Prop 15. (Mark Zuckerberg chipped in a further $12 million.)

Changing the ballot measure threshold to successfully pass tax hikes to a two-thirds majority (as what’s required in the state legislature) or even 50 percent of all eligible voters seems like a commonsense protection from the tyranny of the well-funded union minority. In fact, this reform sounds like a great idea for a future ballot measure. To pass, it would only need the votes of about one-third of eligible voters!

Jordan Bruneau is the communications director at the California Policy Center.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

"direct" - Google News
November 15, 2020 at 10:45PM
https://ift.tt/3f08NOF

The risks and benefits of California’s direct democracy - OCRegister
"direct" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2zVRL3T
https://ift.tt/2VUOqKG
Direct

Bagikan Berita Ini