June 25, 2022 Breaking News, Latest News, and Videos

The Need For Initiative Volunteers:

There is little doubt about the historical veracity of one statement in the text of a recently vetoed California law that would have required at least some signatures for ballot initiatives to be gathered by volunteers instead of paid workers:

“The voters amended the California Constitution to reserve for themselves the power of the initiative because financially powerful interests, including railroad companies, exercised a corrupting influence over state politics.”

In fact, the initiative process did work that way for quite awhile. The best example might have been the so-called Clean Environment Initiative of 1972, a measure that lost – but whose goals have almost all been achieved: a moratorium on new nuclear power plants in California, taking lead out of gasoline and many more provisions now taken for granted.

That initiative, organized by the populist People’s Lobby group headed by the legendary (among initiative aficionados) Ed and Joyce Koupal, is considered the start of the modern initiative era because it opened up shopping malls to petition carriers.

That came after San Bernardino County sheriff’s deputies kicked volunteers out of a mall, and a lawsuit ensued, upholding their right to be there.

Soon after, then-Gov. Ronald Reagan ironically invited the Koupals to meet with him and explain the initiative process. Their meeting bore strong irony because Koupal once led a drive to recall Reagan. But Reagan listened, and soon qualified a tax-cutting initiative for a special election ballot in 1973. That one also lost, but its goal was realized five years later via the Proposition 13 property tax limits.

Reagan’s ballot drive was the first to use significant numbers of paid petition carriers, with corporations, labor unions and big money interests of all types realizing they also could play the initiative game.

Within just a few years, tobacco companies, oil companies, electronics companies, labor unions and many other types of organizations had small armies of petition carriers pushing many different types of causes.

At first, paid carriers got about 25 cents per signature; more recently, some have been paid upwards of $5 per valid name. Initiative petition drives now often cost millions of dollars. It’s become a political truism that anyone with the money to run a petition campaign can qualify just about anything for the ballot, with virtually no need for popular ideas that can draw volunteers.

So much for the original purpose of taking power away from “financially powerful interests.”

Enter the vetoed bill, which passed the Legislature as AB 857. It demanded that least 10 percent of petition signatures be gathered by unpaid workers. That would have been a start toward ensuring that all future ballot measures enjoy at least a modicum of popular support before going to the voters.

The problem Gov. Jerry Brown zeroed in on when vetoing it: labor union members working for an initiative would have been classified as volunteers. That, he felt, gave unions too much of an advantage over other interests.

Some Republicans contended the definition would give a lasting advantage to labor. But there was also nothing to prevent groups on the right from sending their own members out to gather significant numbers of signatures. You can be sure the various Tea Party organizations would have taken heed.

The bill summed up its goal this way: “Improving the measure of public support for a proposed initiative will increase the public confidence and protect the integrity of the initiative process…this is more consistent with the intent of the voters in reserving (to themselves) the power of the initiative.”

This would not have been a panacea for ballot measures. Big money could still have had plenty of influence in the process. The need now is for sponsoring Assemblyman Paul Fong, a Concord Democrat, and others not to give up, but to make their definition of who is a volunteer a bit more pure. Then this needed improvement will probably pass muster with Brown and make a start toward returning initiatives to the populist purpose for which they were always intended.

in Opinion
Related Posts

SMa.r.t. Column: The Mansionization of Santa Monica

June 17, 2022

June 17, 2022

Editor’s note: This column originally appeared in print in 2016.  In the 1980s, Santa Monica’s single family zoning code was...

OP-Ed Response to DTSM Board Chair Barry Snell and Plea to City Council Regarding Safety Ambassadors and Ambassador Program

June 14, 2022

June 14, 2022

I am responding to the OP-ED (dated June 7, 2022, Santa Monica Mirror) by City-appointed DTSM Board Member and now...

SMa.r.t. Column: Wheeling Electrically

June 9, 2022

June 9, 2022

A recent weekend visit to Dana Point, on the Orange County coastline, revealed a curious scene: dozens, if not hundreds...

Population Loss: New Era or Pandemic Glitch?

June 3, 2022

June 3, 2022

By Tom Elias, Columnist The numbers suggest a major change is underway in California. It would take a Nostradamus to...

SMa.r.t. Column: The Sound of Silence Is Big & Tall

June 3, 2022

June 3, 2022

All too often these days we find ourselves wondering how we could have been so correct about so many planning...

OP-Ed: DTSM Chair Barry Snell on Safety Ambassadors

June 2, 2022

June 2, 2022

By Barry Snell Chair, Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. Board of Directors  The Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. (DTSM) Board of Directors...

Affordable Spaces for Small Business

May 27, 2022

May 27, 2022

Los Angeles County recently proposed a program providing financial incentives for certain “Legacy” family businesses in their original historical location....

​​Doubt Removed: Oil Refiners Gouging Us

May 23, 2022

May 23, 2022

By Tom Elias, Columnist There was some room for doubt back in February, when gasoline prices rose precipitously: Until the...

Is the Big Housing Crunch Mostly Fiction?

May 20, 2022

May 20, 2022

By Tom Elias, Columnist In some parts of California, there is definitely a housing crunch: small supplies of homes for...

Is Gelson’s Our Future? Bigger Is Not Better & Not Necessary! – Part 2

May 20, 2022

May 20, 2022

The dream of our beachfront city is about to become a nightmare! Just imagine a tsunami of these projects washing...

Column From Santa Monica Mayor Himmelrich: We Walk the Talk

May 12, 2022

May 12, 2022

By Sue Himmelrich, Santa Moncia Mayor  I like the SMa.r.t. architects. I often agree with them. But in allowing Mark...

Is Gelson’s Our Future? Bigger Is Not Better!

May 12, 2022

May 12, 2022

It’s appalling to see what’s happening in our city – projects recently built or about to be approved – in...

Renting Your Second Home

May 6, 2022

May 6, 2022

If you are among the many Americans who own a second home that you occasionally use as a vacation getaway,...

Column: Cities Fight to Maintain Distinctive Characters

May 6, 2022

May 6, 2022

By Tom Elias, Columnist Anyone who knows California well will realize that Palo Alto does not look much like nearby...

SMa.r.t. Column: Gelson’s, Boxed-In

May 6, 2022

May 6, 2022

This week we are re-visiting an article from 2018 regarding the Miramar project, by simply replacing the word “Miramar” with...