This Site Has Moved
The posts found here are still available for archival purposes and to avoid broken links, but comments are now turned off and there will be no future updates. For all the latest from New America, please go to www.NewAmerica.net
About this Blog
Direct democracy -- the Switzerland-inspired system of initiatives, referenda and recalls that allows voters to make and repeal laws in 24 states -- is poorly understood. It isn’t even very direct. Direct democracy has become blockbuster democracy: a half-billion-dollar international industry of signature gatherers, consultants, and election lawyers who use ballot measures less as a method of making law and more as a tool of mega-communications to boost some politicians, hurt others, and supplement lobbying campaigns.
Blockbuster democracy is a decentralized business that practices wide-open politics. This blog aims to provide a center of news, analysis and conversation for and about the industry. We will report from blockbuster democracy’s capital -- California -- but we’ll monitor ballot measures from across the country and around the globe.
Your Blogger: Joe Mathews is an
User login
The Palin Pick, and Alaska's Direct Democracy
Get ready, America, for a lesson in one of our country's strangest states. What makes Alaska so different? It's not just the cold and the empty landscape. (CORRECTED 9/4): Alaska is one of a few states to have had direct democracy since its founding. Arizona has had the initiative and referendum since statehood, and Oklahoma since shortly after it joined the union.
So it's fair to say that Alaska has been shaped more profoundly by direct democracy than almost any other state in the union. As every bit of Gov. Sarah Palin's life is scrutinized, you'll hear lots of odd things for which direct democracy is part of the answer. (Here's my strongest prediction about this choice: once Americans learn how Alaska works, Leno and Letterman will start making jokes -- and it'll be years before they stop). For example, she'll have to admit -- as she has done in the past -- that she smoked marijuna. But she'll have an explanation that may surprise people. Marijuana was LEGAL in Alaska until 1990, and not just for medicinal purposes. Thank the voters for the right. The voters also took the right away.
You'll also hear about her love of hunting and fishing, and her husband's work as a commercial fisherman and in the oil fields. You'll hear a lot from environmentalists about state management of public land. Alaska law in all these matters has been profoundly shaped by the ballot. And you also should expect to see her attacked by good government types as "not a real reformer" for her decision not to back a ballot initiative establishing public finance in Alaska. The measure was defeated in Tuesday's primary elections there.
For an overview of Alaska's initiative and referenda history, check out the state page on ballotpedia.
- Login to post comments
Not actually "legal"
I'm not clear whether the claim that Gov. Palin's cannabis use was "legal" comes from her, or from you. In either case, it's misguided, since cannabis was and is illegal to possess and use under Federal law, which the voters of Alaska are powerless to repeal. If the misunderstanding is yours, it's of little concern. If it's hers, then she clearly doesn't understand the federal system over which she might wind up presiding. That would be a major worry.
National Initiative for Democracy
Will Palin endorse the National Initiative for Democracy, which will bring direct democracy to the federal level?
Hers
Well, the states (not just Alaska; my own--California--as well) have long agreed to disagree with the feds over drug laws, and other laws.... But Palin has previously explained marijuana use by noting that it was legal at the time. See the following: http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/governor06/story/8049298p-794... Joe Mathews Irvine senior fellow, New America Foundation www.newamerica.net/blog/blockbuster-democracy/
AK not only state to adopt direct democracy since its founding
Besides the nonsense that AK has been shaped more by direct democracy than any other state, you've got your facts wrong.
OK came into the union in 1907 with the initiative.
AZ came into the union in 1911 with the initiative.
NM entered the union in 1912 with the popular referendum.
Finally, if you're relying on ballotpedia, a right-wing funded effort that's aimed at distorting the public's understanding of the initiative, you must be smoking something with gov. palin.
Brain Cramp on Arizona
Writing too fast, I forgot about Arizona. Correcting the error. Deep Throat is right there. On New Mexico, he's not. it never had the initiative. When we refer to direct democracy on this site, I mean states with both initiative and referendum. As for Oklahoma, Deep Throat's view is what you'll find in the textbooks, but it's not quite right. While it's often listed as having I and R since its founding, Oklahoma did not have the initiative at statehood. But it did get the full initiative a few years later. I should have gotten Arizona right and made a note about Oklahoma in the post. I could expand on early Oklahoma history, but I will spare you. As for ballotpedia, I find the site useful, and think they are making a solid effort to track all the measures, which no one else does as thoroughly. But I don't rely on it. I rely on the state's own official data, and sometimes on the Initiative & Referendum Institute at USC, and its site. I'm sure some people would consider IRI to be right-wing as well. We're in an era where the right tends to champion direct democracy, and the left doesn't. But those positions tend to shift depending on which side is winning at the ballot box. Joe Mathews Irvine senior fellow, New America Foundation www.newamerica.net/blog/blockbuster-democracy/