Thanks for Commenting
It's interesting to note that Republicans have discovered they support these kinds of intitiatives since they've been used in other states to limit the rights of minorities, especially gay citizens, among other things. There is such a thing as the tyranny of the majority, and quite often initiatives have been used in this way in recent history.
Still, I have to give you credit for instituting a discussion on this and doing a good job at providing some neglected history. While I don't agree with your take on this, progressives do support polite debate on issues like this, so I'm a fan of your blog.
When talking about who is going to use ballot initiatives, you are truly talking about a "big tent." Early intitiatives will probably include: medical marijuana, parental consent, same-sex marriage, voter identification, and DWI among others.
And you know what? I look forward to voting on each and every one of these issues, and I want you to have the same right. Under the parameters of Rep. Payne's resolution any interested party would only require about 46,000 signatures to get their respective issue on a ballot. This is not a special interest height hurdle. This is an easily attainable goal.
The only ammendment I would recommend is to add the bracketed info: "A constitutional amendment proposed by initiative requires a petition signed by a number of qualified voters equaling not less than eight percent of the votes cast [in each county] for all candidates for governor at the last gubernatorial election, and a statute proposed by initiative requires a petition signed by
... a number of qualified voters equaling not less than five percent of the votes cast [in each county] for all candidates for governor at the last gubernatorial election."
So, Barb if you're ready for Democracy for NM, let me know and we can pull together a coalition of diverse New Mexicans to get this legislation passed.
Come on Mario, you must know my views better than this by now. Given the nightmarish quality of political energies unleashed on the right by Bush et al., it would be very dangerous to loose the hounds of constitutional intiatives on the media-manipulated and fear-focused citizenry right now. Too many bogiemen created every day by the howling Rovians, don't you think?
Barb, to borrow from your original comment…
It's interesting to note that Progressives have started to shy away from these kinds of initiatives since they've been used to pass conservative legislation.
No, I don't think it is dangerous. As I mentioned in my previous comment, many different types of legislation would be introduced and passed. I believe some will pass that I will disagree with, but I am willing to live with that.
As far as media manipulation is concerned, technology is rapidly changing the ability for it to occur on the right or on the left. Rather than manipulation what you are seeing is the mobilization of groups passionate about their issues. Progressives just unleashed their own "political energies," and as a result it appears Governor Dean will land the DNC chairmanship.
Bottomline, at heart I'm a fiscal conservative and a social libertarian, and I have faith in our citizenry when it comes to issues of true importance. I'm disappointed tha
... I'm disappointed that you would choose to shun initiative legislation. You might want to consider whether you have become a member of the "fear-focused citizenry." You seem to now fear democracy.
I don't fear democracy. What I fear is the climate of bigotry, greed and hatred that is being fostered at many levels of our culture. But I've never agreed with making constitutional initiatives easy. There's a reason the founders of our nation made the process difficult, to protect the minorities from the domination by the majority on issues related to civil rights and more.
As for the media, you have to admit the Bush administration has pushed restraints on mainstream outlets since they first came into office.
Thank goodness for online access to news and blogs. Unfortunately, many ordinary people don't have access to the net yet. But it's growing.
Glad to hear you're a social libertarian. Better libertarian than Republican on social issues!
You're the second person to bring up our nation's founders with regard to statewide initiatives. It's pretty clear in the history lesson provided by my original post that our nation's founder have nothing to do with our state's lack of a ballot initiative process.
I also think it is kind of reaching to tie the intentions of our nation's founders in with what we now lump under the heading of "civil rights."
This is not to imply that I have a problem with current civil rights. It is simply intended to point out that many of the rights we now take for granted, and in some cases demand, did not exist when the U.S. Constitution was created.
I will try and find a more case sensitive "Madisonian" example but as a Madison student it ought to suffice tha t Madison spoke of misdisquisitions and
animadversions. He was very cautious, but not ever fearful of common good-willed opinions. If there was a fear it was of the passions of power, in fact he sights Mills, doing no harm, and
the duties of govt. to bring together interests, and in his most decisive statements, doing nothing rather than...
annother words he documents limited,real independent, gov't almost as a saintly endeavor. Fear! Bull!
previous....
Madison no fear
It's difficult to change constitutions. For a reason. Let's keep it that way.
Commenting by HaloScan
