Updated on June 2 with subsequent comments from the Whitman campaign noting that she is not necessarily advocating doing away with the initiative process, but would like to consider revisions.
GOP gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman says it may be time to retire the state’s citizen-initiative process. She made the comment during her town hall meeting with Sen. John McCain on Friday, and since it has gotten little attention in my story on the event or from others, I’ll get it on the record here.
She said that the state has $50 billion in obligatory annual spending mandated by ballot measures.
“In many ways, the proposition process has worn out its usefulness,” said the former eBay CEO.
A spokesman for GOP contender Steve Poizner took a contrary position when I relayed Whitman’s statement this morning.
“Poizner is supportive of the initiative process, and would be reluctant to restrict that,” said Poizner aide Kevin Spillane. “The people in California make better decisions than the Legislature.”
While Whitman opposed Props. 1A, 1B and 1C last month, she supported the other three measures. Props. 1E and 1D would have lifted the funding mandate for early childhood development and mental health programs approved by previous ballot measures, which in turn would have made that money available for other uses.
Poizner opposed all six ballot measures.
Update: Yesterday evening I received a call from Whitman aide Mitch Zak, who wanted to make it clear that Whitman is not advocating the abolition of the initiative process. He said she’d like to see a constitutional convention and one of the issues she’d like to see considered for possible revision is the initiative process, Zak said. He also forwarded this quote from Whitman on a constitutional convention:
“I support the concept of a constitutional convention that can update California’s governance structure and believe it can be a catalyst for reform that helps California move forward,” Whitman said.
Calbuzz has followed up on the prospect of a constitutional convention and tracked down the positions Poizner and Tom Campbell, who’s also seeking the GOP gubernatorial nomination. In short, Poizner poopoos the idea right now and Campbell supports it.
“The state constitution was written over 100 years ago and could be improved in many ways,” Calbuzz quotes Poizner as saying in a written statement. “But the problems facing California have more to do with the mistakes of the last 100 months than the limitations of a 100 year old document. At this time, Sacramento doesn’t seem able to write a budget, much less a constitution. Focus on a new constitution will sadly be used by the Sacramento crowd as one more excuse they can’t do their jobs . . . My message to Sacramento is simple: do your job and then let’s talk about a new constitution.”
Calbuzz reports that Campbell “says he ’strongly supports’ the convention proposal because revisions of a ‘fundamental nature’ are needed. One crucial constitutional change, he said, is to require ballot initiatives that call for new spending to identify the source of money needed to implement them - either a cut in an existing program or a new tax or fee; that claim should then be validated by a neutral third party, like the Legislative Counsel.”
There’s a lot of talk about Whitman being difficult for the press to track down for an interview, although that hasn’t been my experience. Click here to read my one-on-one with her.
Do you agree that the state’s initiative process sometimes runs amok? After all, voters say we need to cut the state budget, but when given the opportunity to do so last month with Props. 1E and 1D, they declined to do so.
Prop 1E was a request to re-direct funds set aside by an additional 1% tax imposed on Californians with income $1,000,000 in 2004.
Had 1E asked to do away with the prop 63 1% tax, returning the estimated $750 million to the economy. Would it have passed?
Prop 1D was a request to re-direct funds set aside by an additional tax on cigarettes of 50 cents/pack, as well as additional taxes on other tobacco products. Money to establish early childhood development and smoking prevention programs.
If Prop 10 is valid spend the money where it belongs, else undue the tax.
Though I realize that less tax doesn’t help them.
Neither of these (or any of the others) cut the state budget, they were moves to allow the state legislature to funnel funds from “protected tax sources” into the general fund so that they could misuse them as well.
Flatline - Yes, they may not use the money in the way you think is best. But do you think childhood development and mental health as they’re currently allocated is the best use? Because they’re going to be cutting other programs now instead….
Martin Wisckol, “Yes, they may not use the money in the way you think is best.”
What I think is best is not at issue. The tax was voted and approved for a specific purpose. If that purpose is no longer valid they need to remove the tax. If they require tax funds for some other purpose (ie: general fund) they need to put it to a vote.
I voted against both of these taxes in their original ballot.
Martin:
Props. 1D and 1E didn’t cut the budget. They re-directed dedicated tax revenues into the general fund.
Matt - You’re correct. Apologies for any confusion I’ve caused on the issue.
Another reason WHY I wouldn’t vote for Whitman: “In many ways, the proposition process has worn out its usefulness,” said the former eBay CEO.”
The initiative process gives a voice to the people. The alternative is no voice. The process has not worn out its usefulness. It keeps a check and balance on the State government.
The citizens did not put propositions 1A-F on the ballot. the thieving legislators did. They need to overhaul their spending, not just move tax money around in a shell game with Props 1E & 1D. That is not cutting the state budget. Oh wait, I forgot, Sacramento thinks stopping future increases is a budget cut. Those gangsters would love to get rid of the citizen initiative process, just like they would love to get rid of the 2/3 vote requirement and Prop. 13, that way those pesky voters wouldn’t be able to stop those legislators from spending and taxing us into oblivion.
Whitman is no longer in the running as far as I am concerned.
Cranky Finally and Bobbyc hit the nail on the head. Whitman doesn’t have a clue what’s been going on in California for the last 20+ years. She will never get the conservative vote siding with the out of touch legislators in Sacramento.
Whitman just put the final nail in her own coffin.
No doubt!
Leave it to the buffoons in Screw-u-mento, and we all would be paying 80% more on our taxes!
Until California leaders step up, and deal with the illegal immigration issue, any ballot measure designed to save the California budget, is useless, and will NEVER pass! No matter now many government programs need to be eliminated, and works laid-off!
The leaders in Sacramento need to understand that NO ONE here wants to be taxed more, for the good of those who don’t pay tax, and are breaking laws!
You can’t have law-breakers, and then expect the average citizen to cover it!
I think California (like GM) will need to go Bankrupt, before the lawmakers realize MAJOR thing need to be changed here in this state!
It sad that many good hard-working, tax paying, citizens will have to suffer, because of a bunch of PC leaders who can’t uphold the law!
Word to those in Sacramento… The… ‘you know what’… WILL hit the fan, soon! So good luck remaining blind, dumb, and PC when that happens!
Ideally, the initiative process should bring the population more control over their own lives and government. However, abysmal turnouts, people signing any petition thrust under their noses outside of Target stores, and voters who can’t comprehend anything beyond what they see in a TV commercial are arguments for abolishing the process.
Personally, I’ve seen little evidence that the average person is remotely capable of acting in his own self-interest while standing in a voting booth. Instead, he’ll do anything that the “coalition of consumers, taxpayers, and families” with the biggest TV and mailer budget tells him to do.
I just watched an old movie where a British Sergeant Major says derisively “The commandant signs bits of paper. He’d sign his own death warrant if I handed it to him.” And that is emblematic of what the initiative process has become.
I agee, Jason! The biggest misnomer is the wording in SO many bond propositions that specifically state “will not raise taxes.” The wording fails to mention the future general account liability. Uninformed voters, and this is not all voters mind you, pass such things without a care. These are the people increasing obligatory spending, without first thinking “where is this money going to come from in the future?” It becomes a shell game….the ballot-box mentality increases overall obligations for what amounts to feel-good measures, but no one wants to take something else off the table in exchange.
I think the wording of the propositions and measures needs to be re-vamped to include HOW they will be covered by future generations, if at all.
Amen to that!
BTW how’s that bullet train thingy coming along?
…… Yeah I thought so.
What on earth was she thinking?? Californians are trying to save the State, while the bozos (no offense to clowns) in SAC are just trying to rake in more money and power. I do have to agree, though, we’ve had a bad run on ignorance taking over the initiative process, giving credence to those who support Whitman’s point of view. Maybe there needs to be a pre-test before one is able to vote, to see if they are informed enough to cast a vote…how do you get an informed populace??
Wow. She just lost my vote. Another big brother in a pants suit. Why do politicians always think they know what is best for the voters?
Yes, the voters have foolishly passed bond issue after bond issue like a drunk with a box of blank checks. But the voers also put Prop 13 on the ballot and it has kept property taxes from driving homeowners out of their homes. The voters also passed three strikes to counter liberal judges who could not bring themselves to admit some criminals are too bad to ever let out. The process may be flawed to some, but it is democracy in action to the rest of us.
Whitman, either you eat your words or don’t bother running under any party!
I don’t believe I’ve ever agreed with Meg on anything, but this one almost makes up for it. I wouldn’t mind a bit if the number of qualifying signatures went up to 5 million and it’s absolutely obvious that legal oversight at the Attorney General and Secretarty of State levels needs to be bolstered. Also, the $200 filing fee means any goof with a headful of mush can clog the system. Take a look at the Secretary of State website, in the Ballot Initiative section. It’s ridiculous !
Her stance on the initiative process alone could convince me to vote for her!
“Poizner is supportive of the initiative process, and would be reluctant to restrict that,” said Poizner aide Kevin Spillane. “The people in California make better decisions than the Legislature.”
This statement by Mr. Poizner’s spokesman should disqualify him from this race. We have a REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY where our entire governmental system is based on electing officials to weigh the pros and cons (and costs) of proposed policies and to vote on them in a way that is accountable to the public (via that crazy little process we called ELECTIONS). To circumvent this through the whims of popularity contests, where few of the pros and cons (and costs) are considered, leads to the type of mess the state of California currently finds itself in. I’m a life-long Democrat but will vote for a gubernatorial candidate who tells us the truth - as opposed to candidates like Mr. Poizner who don’t even understand our political system and are all too eager to pander rather than lead.
When only 23 percent turnout, I think her point about the initiative process is well taken.
I would rather have “23%” informed, caring voters turn out then 100% where 70% don’t care to even know what their vote means.
Flatline, you are so right. I ran one of the polls and you can’t believe some of the people that do vote. Let me list a few comments.
I don’t know who to vote for, so who is winning.
I didn’t read my sample ballot, how is everyone voting.
I’m a lifelong Dem so I just vote the way my party wants (this could go either way)
I don’t understand most of this, but I feel I should vote.
Personally, I have to partially agree with the last one. Some of these props are written in such a way as to deceive or mislead the voter. I would like these props to go through a panel for misleading statements and written clearly before it gets on a sample ballot. I still do believe in propositions, only because of what I see in Sacramento. Our biggest problem is voter apathy. I don’t know if voter apathy gave us bad leaders or bad leaders gave us voter apathy.
I agree with Whitman– any 2 bit whackjob can get an initiative going for about anything— in time it hurts everyone—– time to go…
Unfortunately, any two bit whackjob in Sacramento can do the same thing and has.