Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Tables and Figures
- Preface
- Introduction: A Clash of Rising Powers
- PART I THE QUEST FOR MAJORITY RULE
- 1 The Epic Debate
- 2 Direct Democracy Gathers Force
- PART II COUNTERING THE MAJORITY
- PART III THE MAJORITY STRIKES BACK
- Conclusion: A New Constitutional Equilibrium
- Appendix: Post-Election Initiative Invalidations
- References
- Index
- References
2 - Direct Democracy Gathers Force
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Tables and Figures
- Preface
- Introduction: A Clash of Rising Powers
- PART I THE QUEST FOR MAJORITY RULE
- 1 The Epic Debate
- 2 Direct Democracy Gathers Force
- PART II COUNTERING THE MAJORITY
- PART III THE MAJORITY STRIKES BACK
- Conclusion: A New Constitutional Equilibrium
- Appendix: Post-Election Initiative Invalidations
- References
- Index
- References
Summary
In 1970, an American Political Science Review article asked, “What ever happened to direct democracy?” By the late 1960s, the initiative process seemed to be moribund in most states and many scholars had come to believe that direct citizen lawmaking, like the horse and buggy, was a relic of history. According to the prevailing view, “[t]he Madisons and Burkes who feared the excesses of democracy may rest in peace.” But, the requiems were, of course, premature. Even as the article circulated, the initiative power was poised to begin a dramatic and sustained resurgence.
This brief story demonstrates direct democracy's resilience. Once embedded in a state's constitutional structure, the process can fall dormant, but later revive. This chapter traces the varying strength of direct citizen lawmaking over time and across states, from its early flourishing in the Progressive Era, through its mid-century decline, to its more recent renewal.
CHANGES IN INITIATIVE USE OVER TIME
Figure 2.1 provides an overview of varying levels of initiative use over time by presenting the total number of statewide initiatives adopted in the twenty-four initiative states, by decade, over the past century.
1900s–1910s: “The Oregon System” and Progressive Era Enthusiasm
Citizens in Oregon adopted twenty-five statewide initiatives between 1904 and 1910 and remained the only voters to enact initiatives until Oklahomans adopted two in 1910.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Direct Democracy and the Courts , pp. 41 - 72Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2009
References
, The Operation of the Initiative, Referendum, and Recall in Oregon (New York: Macmillan, 1915), 78Google Scholar
, Democratic Delusions: The Initiative Process in America (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2002), 32–4Google Scholar
, Direct Legislation: Voting on Ballot Propositions in the United States (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984), 14–15Google Scholar
, “Public Policymaking and Direct Democracy in the Twentieth Century: The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same,” in , ed., The Battle Over Citizen Lawmaking: An In-Depth Review of the Growing Trend to Regulate the People's Tool of Self Government: The Initiative and Referendum Process (Durham: Carolina Academic Press, 2001), 40–1Google Scholar
, Paradise Lost: California's Experience, America's Future (New York: The New Press, 1998), 27–52Google Scholar
, “California Revises its Constitution,” Western Political Quarterly 22, no. 3 (Sept. 1969): 637–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “The Revision of California's Constitution,” 3 CPS Brief (California Policy Seminar, April 1991), 3–6Google Scholar
, The Sometime Govérnments: A Critical Study of the 50 American Legislatures (New York: Bantam, 1971), 48–54Google Scholar
, Legislature: California's School for Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982)Google Scholar
and , Tax Revolt: Something for Nothing in California, enlarged edition (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985), 24–5Google Scholar
, Citizen Lawmakers: The Ballot Initiative Revolution (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989), 21Google Scholar
, Democracy Derailed: Initiative Campaigns and the Power of Money (New York: Harcourt, 2000), 7Google Scholar
, “A Digest Describing the Public's Confidence in Institutions,” California Opinion Index, vol. 6 (October 1981)Google Scholar
, The Initiative Cookbook: Recipes and Stories from California's Ballot Wars (San Francisco: Democracy Center, 1996), 81–2Google Scholar
, “Who's The Boss? Direct Democracy and Popular Control of Government” in , ed., Broken Contract?: Changing Relationships Between Americans and Their Government (Boulder, CO: Westview, 1996), 282Google Scholar
, “Introduction: The Legacy of Proposition 13,” in , ed., California and the American Tax Revolt: Proposition 13 Five Years Later (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984), 7Google Scholar
, Tax Crusaders and the Politics of Direct Democracy (New York: Routledge, 1998), 85–127Google Scholar
, “A Brief History of I & R and the Tax Revolt” in , ed., Initiative and Referendum Almanac (Durham: Carolina Academic Press, 2003), 496–99Google Scholar
and , “Measuring the Effect of Direct Democracy on State Policy: Not all Initiatives are Created Equal,” State Politics and Policy Quarterly 4, no. 3 (Fall 2004): 345–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “The Initiative: A Comparative State Analysis and Reassessment of a Western Phenomenon,” Western Political Quarterly 28, no. 2 (June 1975): 250–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, The Color Bind: California's Battle to End Affirmative Action (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998)Google Scholar
, ed., California Votes: The 1994 Governor's Race: An Inside Look at the Candidates and Their Campaigns by the People Who Managed Them (Berkeley: Institute of Governmental Studies Press, 1995)
, The People's Machine: Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Rise of Blockbuster Democracy (New York: Public Affairs, 2006)Google Scholar
, California: America's High-Stakes Experiment (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2006)Google Scholar
, , , and , “California's Political Warriors: Campaign Professionals and the Initiative Process,” in , , and , eds., Citizens as Legislators: Direct Democracy in the United States (Columbus: The Ohio State University Press, 1998), 55–79Google Scholar
, “Signature Gathering in the Initiative Process: How Democratic Is It?” 64 Mont. L. Rev35 (2003)Google Scholar
, Term Limits and the Dismantling of Legislative Professionalism (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 7–12Google Scholar
, Pressure Politics: The Story of the Anti-Saloon League (New York: Columbia University Press, 1928), 176Google Scholar
, The Indirect Effect of Direct Legislation: How Institutions Shape Interest Group Systems (Columbus: The Ohio State University Press, 2005), 3–7, 79, 145Google Scholar
, , and , Punishment and Democracy: Three Strikes and You're Out in California (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 178–9Google Scholar
and with , Three Strikes and You're Out! A Promise to Kimber: The Chronicle of America's Toughest Anti-Crime Law (Fresno, CA: Quill Driver Books, 1996)Google Scholar
, Cruel Justice: Three Strikes and the Politics of Crime in America's Golden State (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004)Google Scholar
, For the Many or the Few: The Initiative, Public Policy, and American Democracy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004), 94–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Thirty Years of the People's Rule in Oregon: An Analysis,” Political Science Quarterly 47, no. 2 (June 1932): 257–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , The Initiative and the Referendum in California (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1939), 572Google Scholar
and , “Direct Legislation: An Appraisal and a Suggestion,” American Political Science Review 45, no. 2 (June 1951): 404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, The Populist Paradox: Interest Group Influence and the Promise of Direct Legislation (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999), 121–36Google Scholar
, “Limiting Government Through Direct Democracy,” Policy Analysis, No. 420 (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute, Dec. 13, 2001), 1–17Google Scholar
, , , and , “Constitutional Change: Is It Too Easy to Amend our State Constitution?” in and , eds., Constitutional Reform in California: Making State Government More Effective and Responsive (Berkeley: Institute of Governmental Studies Press, 1995), 265, 289Google Scholar
, , and , “When Does the Ballot Box Limit the Budget? Politics and Spending Limits in California, Colorado, Utah and Washington,” in , , and , eds., Fiscal Challenges: An Inter-Disciplinary Approach to Budget Policy (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008)Google Scholar
, “Direct Democracy and Fiscal Gridlock: Have Voter Initiatives Paralyzed the California Budget? State Politics and Policy Quarterly 5, no. 3 (2005): 248–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Legislatures,” in and , eds., Handbook of Political Science, Vol. 3 (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1975), 277Google Scholar
, “Some Arguments Against Congressional Term Limits,” 16 Harv. J. L. & Pub. Pol'y 101 (1993)Google Scholar
, Term Limits and the Dismantling of State Legislative Professionalism (Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 2005)Google Scholar
and , Adapting to Term Limits: Recent Experiences and New Directions (San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California, 2004)Google Scholar
, “When Initiative Lawmaking Is Not ‘Republican Government’: The Campaign Against Homosexuality,” 72 Ore. L. Rev. 19 (1993)Google Scholar
, “Putting Civil Rights to a Popular Vote,” American Journal of Political Science. 41, no. 1 (1997): 245–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “Direct Democracy and Minority Rights: An Extension,” American Journal of Political Science 42, no. 3 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , “Minorities and Direct Legislation: Evidence from California Ballot Proposition Elections,” Journal of Politics 64, no. 1 (2002): 154–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and : “The Populist Legacy: Initiatives and the Undermining of Representative Government,” in , , and , eds. Dangerous Democracy?: The Battle Over Ballot Initiatives in America (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2001), 38–48Google Scholar
, Just the Facts: Californians and the Initiative Process (San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California, 2006)Google Scholar
and , Educated by Initiative: The Effects of Direct Democracy on Citizens and Political Organizations in the United States (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “Institutions and Attitudes about Citizen Influence on Government,” British Journal of Political Science 32 (2002): 371–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Legislative Response to the Threat of Popular Initiatives,” American Journal of Political Science 40, no. 1 (1996): 99–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “Governing By Initiative: Structuring the Ballot Initiative: Procedures that Do and Don't Work,” 66 U. Colo. L. Rev. 47, 76–81 (1995)Google Scholar
, Direct Democracy or Representative Government?: Dispelling the Populist Myth (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2001)Google Scholar