Blockbuster Democracy

Next week, I'll be representing North America at the 2009 Global Forum on Modern Direct Democracy in Seoul, South Korea. This is the second global forum -- the first took place last year in Switzerland. For purposes of translation, speeches had to be submitted several weeks early, and they are now available here on the web (including my own). For those interested in the global dimensions of direct democracy, the speeches offer a sort of world survey of the progress of initiative and referendum, from Europe to Asia to Latin America (and with country-specific reports from Austria to Japan).

Look for plenty of reports on this blog next week and via twitter at joemmathews (yep, there's an extra "m").

Ralph Nader and Gregory Fossedal (you know the former; the latter is author of "Direct Democracy in Switzerland," one of the best books I've ever read on initiative and referendum) are teaming up on a new book, "Direct Democracy: What if the People Ran the Country?" It's scheduled for publication in July 2010 by Seven Stories Press. Juding from this brief description, the book offers a critique of America's republican government and makes the case for direct democracy on the federal level.

Your blogger had never heard of dog-racing until he was a college student in Boston and visited the track known as Wonderland. A very strange place. In less than two weeks it will close, the victim of another successful ballot initiative from the direct democracy juggernaut that is the animal protection lobby. (This initiative banned dog racing).

In other Massachusetts initiative news, the state's attorney general disqualified an initiative petition seeking to legalize on-line poke by arguing that the petition was not in the correct format. But she certified another petition to reverse an increase in the state liquor. tax.

I know you'll be as relieved as I was to hear the news that backers of an initiative to establish a commission on extraterrestrial matters in Denver appear to have more than enough signatures to qualify the measure for the city ballot. Apparently, 7,000 people signed their names to this petition. Assuming that most of them were earthlings registered to vote in Denver, qualification is a formality.

Previous efforts to qualify similar measures have failed. But this time, backers wrote the initiative to make clear that no taxpayer funds will be used to support the commission. (Gifts and donations will be the only source of funding). The commission's mission? To "collect and share with the public, credible evidence of extraterrestrial UFOs and intelligent life forms that have been visiting Earth," says this story. Since Denver is a mile high (and thus likely the first place to be attacked), It's good that this threat is being taken seriously.

Printing petitions on carbon copy paper is a good idea -- if your intention is to let voters take home a copy of what they signed. (Often, they don't have time to read what they signed). It also would provide a very basic fraud protection. But carbon copies are often prohibited by state laws and regulations on petitions.

Folks in Daytona Beach, Florida, want to bring carbon copies into the process -- but for the wrong reasons. Backers of multiple ballot measures there -- six measures in all -- circulated three petitions together on carbon paper so voters could sign three petitions with one signature. That's efficient, I suppose, and a nice way to save money. And, yes, the circulators reportedly gave voters the option of signing a single petition separately. But carbon paper, in this case, is simply being used for mass production of ballot measures. That's not a good reason to change the law. (Hat tip: Ballot Access News).

California voters passed a multibillion dollar bond for high-speed rail last fall -- despite the fact that there's no clear plan for building such rail (and estimates of the costs far exceed the value of the bond). This is bad news. The prospect of big money -- without a specific plan -- creates, as they say in the retail trade, shrinkage.

This morning comes this story from Shane Goldmacher at the LA Times describing how the state's high-speed rail commission, which has four gubernatorial appointees, are about to give a contract to political advisors to Gov. Schwarzenegger. This is almost certainly legal -- but it smells. For the good of high-speed rail (assuming high-speed rail is real and not merely a big pot of money), this contract should not go forward.

UPDATE: the contract's been delayed.

Maine should be the national capital of direct democracy this fall. Money is pouring in from around the country to campaigns for and against a referendum on a legislation to legalize same-sex marriage in the state. There are three big initiatives on the ballot: to establish a state spending limit, to de-criminalize marijuana, and to cut taxes for citizens who use energy efficiently.

And among Mainers, at least, these issues may all be eclipsed by a bitter fight over a referendum that seeks to overturn a new law consolidating school districts in the state. Nothing is more controversial than school consolidation. Maine, a state of 1.3 million people, has 285 school districts. (Los Angeles, a city of 4 million, has one district, though that's not necessarily a model). The law facing referendum would reduce that number to 80. 

The legislature itself added two measures, including a modest reform that would give authorities more time to examine signatures on direct democracy petitions. That's the kind of change that makes the process better (but does not reduce access to the ballot, as in Nevada). 

At least local taxes. Ballotpedia notes that most of the local taxes on Aug. 25 ballots in California passed.

This is an interesting issue because of the widespread interest among good government groups in the state of returning more power over taxes and spending to local governments. After the passage of Prop 13 in 1978, the state bailed out local governments that lost property tax revenues and in the process centralized fiscal decision-making in the state Capitol.

The Nevada legislature, in the guise of cleaning up signature gathering, has made it harder to qualify a measure for the ballot. Much harder.

The legislature recently imposed a distribution requirement that forces circulators to collect the signatures of 10 percent of the turnout in the most recent election in each of the state's Congressional districts. This makes the overall number of signatures to qualify an initiative from the ballot is now 60 percent higher -- 97,000 signatures, instead of 59,000, according to the Nevada Secretary of State.

Your blogger is sympathetic to efforts to clean up signature gathering and to make it harder to qualify initiatives -- as long as they are accompanied by measures to open access.  (In particular, the standards for qualifying referendum -- that is, reversals of legislative actions -- should be eased, and time limits on collecting signatures should be lengthened, to make the process less costly). But cleaning up the process involves doing better, more thorough checking of signatures. That's not what Nevada did.

With Referendum 71 appearing to have just enough signatures to qualify for the Washington state ballot, it's time for the legal challenges. Two interesting issues are being raised in court by opponents of the referendum (who are supporters of gay rights and same-sex marriage. 71 is a referendum of a law granting the rights of married couples to domestic partners in Washington).

1. What happens if petition circulators screw up? Circulators are supposed to sign and attest each page of signatures they collect. Inevitably, some simply forget. The Washington Secretary of State has decided to count those signatures -- about 2,000 -- anyway. Usually, this problem would be too small to matter, but Referendum 71 appears to have less than 1,000 signatures more than the requirement.

2. What happens if the person signing the petition wasn't a registered voter at the moment he or she signed? It's common practice -- in Washington state and elsewhere -- for petition circulators, when they encounter someone who isn't a registered voter, to have that person sign a registration form and then sign petitions. This is a very good thing -- petition circulators register hundreds of thousands of voters each year. But Referendum 71 opponents want to challenge the signatures in this case. The Washington Secretary of State instructed counters to check that signers were registered to vote -- but not to check the date.