California is very fond of the ballot initiative. Coming from a different state with a different political culture, this baffles me.
This biggest, most obvious problem with democracy is that the majority will vote themselves benefits at the expense of the minority. The authors of the U.S. constitution were aware of this, and they created elitist systems on top of direct democracy in an attempt to minimize the issues. Senators were elected by state legislators, not by the people, and the president was elected by the state electors, not by popular vote. Over time we’ve move toward more direct democracy, but we still remain a representative democracy: our laws are not made by the people, they are made by the representatives that we elect.
When it works, this is a good system. We are all busy people, and we can’t keep track of all the important issues. Neither can our representatives, but they can hire staff to help them, and they can focus full time on deciding these issues wisely. Obviously in practice there are many difficulties, mostly in the area of money, but it mostly works well enough.
Except in California, where many important issues are decided by a direct vote by the people. I think this merely encourages demagoguery, not on behalf of a person, but on behalf of a specific issue. I don’t want to have to research these issues and figure out where I stand. I want to elect a person who has the time to consider them in detail, and who is intelligent enough to make a good decision.
I wonder how feasible it would be to pass a ballot initiative which made it much harder to create new ballot initiatives.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.