Text "writers indicated that the argu-
ments they present are standard argu-
ments advanced by proponents and
opponents of direct legislation. Both
positions are stated below.
THE INDICTMENT
The consensus is that direct legisla-
tion has not enlisted the interest of the
electorate to any degree in any state.
The number of persons who vote on
proposals is even less than those who
vote for candidates. Most voters vote
blindly, sometimes passing bills directly
opposed to each other in the same elec-
tion. Voters almost invariably approve
bills requiring appropriations but reject
those calling for tax increases necessary
to support expenditures. Government
becomes a government of minorities be-
cause a minority of the electorate de-
cides too many questions. Determined
minorities often use the initiative to fur-
ther their own ends, taking advantage
of the fact that many voters fail to vote
on measures of no interest to them, while
benefited minorities vote to a man.
Because both are needed to win elec-
tions, money and organization become
vital in determining important policy.
The responsibility of political parties
has been damaged by the emphasis
placed on direct policymaking. Legis-
lative responsibility also has been re-
duced by the privilege extended by the
optional referendum. Pressure groups
still dominate state legislatures; all the
direct process does is cause political
leaders to alter their techniques.
Furthermore, many measures which
are initiated and placed on the ballot
are poorly drafted and the ballot, even
if the measures are proper, is becoming
longer. The long ballot is now even
longer, ominously extended by the addi-
|
tion of technical questions on which
people have little knowledge; also, it is
not uncommon for identical questions
to appear in election after election.
"[Finally] what questions could be
put to an electorate? In an age when
531 representatives and senators who
are paid so well for their time that
they do not have to have other means
of livelihood, and who are staffed for
the investigation of the merits of pro-
posed legislation, have to throw up
their hands and say there are many
details on which they cannot pass and
which they must leave to administra-
tive determination, it is absurd to sug-
gest that counting the public pulse
can give any light or leading save on
the simplest kind of a proposition."17
THE DEFENSE
If minorities use money and organiza-
tion to influence the electorate, they
influence the legislature even more, as
countless instances reveal. All govern-
ment in finality is the work of minori-
ties. If people vote blindly on issues,
so do they on representatives, and legis-
lators do so in legislative bodies as well.
If people have been financially irrespon-
sible, have the legislatures of states with-
out direct legislation been any better?
If the legislature has been able to sub-
mit to the people issues which it felt
were too hot to handle, is this fact bad?
It is better, perhaps, to give legislators
a shield of popular resistance against
the insidious influences of the ever-
present lobbyists.
On the positive side, direct legislation
takes ultimate control from politicians
and makes the people masters of their
17L. rogers, the pollsters 78 (1949).
73
|
