|
Process Available
Initiative
Popular Referendum
Legislative Referendum
Elections Division
Initiative
Historical Listing
Basic Steps to
Undertake an Initiative Campaign
I&R Constitutional and Statutory Provisions
Additional Links
Howard
Jarvis Taxpayers Association and Prop 13
Hastings Law Library
CA Initiative Database 1911 - Present
Hastings Law Library
CA Proposition Database 1911 - Present
|
Californians
rightly credit Progressive-era Governor Hiram Johnson with leading the
successful fight for direct democracy in the Golden State, but few are familiar
with the critical groundwork that had been laid by Dr. John Randolph Haynes. A
Philadelphian who held doctorates in both medicine and philosophy, Haynes moved
west to Los Angeles in 1887, at the age of 34. He established a successful
medical practice, counting many prominent Southern Californians among his
patients, invested his profits skillfully in real estate, and eventually became
a millionaire.
In 1895 Haynes helped found the California Direct
Legislation League, dedicated to winning the rights of initiative, referendum,
and recall both statewide and in every local jurisdiction. He won election in
1900 to a Los Angeles "board of freeholders" responsible for drafting a new
charter for that city. Haynes used this strategic position to make sure that the
board included I&R in the new charter, only to see the entire charter thrown out
by the courts on a technicality. A new board, without Haynes, was elected in
1902, but he continued to advocate I&R and brought Eltweed Pomeroy of New
Jersey, president of the National Direct Legislation League, from the east coast
specifically to address the board. After Pomeroy's speech, the board voted to
include initiative, referendum, and recall in the new charter. Voters ratified
the charter in 1903.
Haynes then concentrated his efforts on winning statewide I&R. The odds against
him were daunting. The entire state government had for decades been under the
control of the Southern Pacific Railroad. Bribery was the accepted method of
doing business in the state capitol. Realizing the hopelessness of dealing with
the current officeholders, Haynes and other reformers began a campaign to get
rid of them and remake state government from top to bottom. In May 1907 they
founded the Lincoln-Roosevelt League of Republican Clubs, and elected several of
their candidates to the legislature. Once elected, these legislators worked for
a bill to require the nomination of party candidates through primary election
rather than the backroom deals of state party conventions. The bill passed, and
the League's 1910 gubernatorial candidate, Hiram Johnson, ran in the state's
first primary election. Johnson won the primary and the general election and
swept dozens of other reformers into the legislature on his political coattails.
Johnson and the new Progressive majority in the
legislature made the most sweeping governmental changes ever seen in the history
of California. Among these were the introduction of initiative, referendum, and
recall at both the state and local levels. Voters ratified these amendments in a
special election on October 10, 1911.
Reformers in Los Angeles won voter approval, in
December 1911, of a unique local initiative to create a municipally owned, yet
editorially independent, newspaper to compete with the anti-labor, anti-reform
Los Angeles Times and provide unbiased news and an equal forum for all political
views. Each political party was given a column in every weekly edition.
This bold experiment in free speech attracted the
state's top newspaper talent and got off to a highly successful start. After
less than a year, however, it failed because of the harassment of vendors and an
advertiser boycott organized by the Los Angeles reformers' arch-enemy, Harrison
Gray Otis, owner of the Times.
The first significant statewide initiative in
California abolished the poll tax in 1914, and a construction bond initiative
for the University of California also won voter approval that year. Immediately
thereafter, anti-initiative forces launched their first counterattack, in the
form of a constitutional amendment passed by the legislature to make it more
difficult to pass initiative bond proposals. Haynes mobilized his pro-initiative
forces and defeated the amendment at the polls in 1915.
Anti-initiative forces tried again in 1920; this
time using the initiative process themselves to propose a measure that would
have made it virtually impossible to put any tax-related initiatives on future
ballots. Haynes mobilized his forces again and defeated the measure at the
polls; and he won a third, similar contest in 1922. After this he changed the
name of his California Direct Legislation League to "The League to Protect the
Initiative," and for the rest of his life kept close watch over the legislature
to make sure that it enacted no laws to restrict I&R procedures. Haynes died on
October 30, 1937, at the age of 84.
On the ballot in 1934 were four successful
constitutional initiatives to revamp the state's law enforcement and criminal
justice systems. All four were sponsored by Alameda County District Attorney
Earl Warren, who went on to become the state's attorney general in 1938, its
governor in 1942, and the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1953. The
principal changes involved procedures for judicial selection and retention, and
increasing the woefully inadequate powers and jurisdiction of the office of
attorney general. Warren's foresight in revamping the justice system before
running for attorney general accounted in no small measure for his effectiveness
once elected, which in turn made possible his rise to higher office.
Each decade for the first half of this century, the
number of signatures required to put a statewide initiative on the ballot
roughly doubled. It was set at 8 percent of the number of votes cast in the
previous gubernatorial election. In 1911 this was 30,481 signatures; in 1930, it
was 91,529; in 1939, it was 212,117. The rapid change was due to California's
explosive population growth and the increasing participation of women as voters.
As petition requirements increased, the number of initiatives qualifying for the
ballot decreased, particularly in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s.
One of the highest stakes initiative campaigns, in
terms of campaign spending was the 1956 struggle over changes in the state
regulation and taxation of oil and gas production. The initiative was sponsored
by one group of oil companies that sought to make their business more
profitable, and opposed by another group of oil firms that preferred the
existing system. Campaign funds spent by both sides totaled over $5 million. The
1956 initiative lost: California voters, inundated with conflicting claims about
a complex measure, took the cautious route and voted "no."
Almost as expensive was the gargantuan 1958
labor-capital conflict over a "Right to Work" (open shop) initiative sponsored
by employers. This battle ended in a double defeat for employers: not only did
voters decisively reject the initiative, but the opposition campaign mobilized
Democrats and union members to vote in droves, resulting in the election of
Governor Edmund G. Brown, Sr., the first Democrat to occupy that office in 16
years.
In the 1960s, California liberals soured on the
initiative process as a result of two measures passed by voters in 1964. The
first repealed the Rumford Fair Housing Act, which the legislature had passed,
and Governor Brown had signed, in 1963. The second banned cable television. That
measure was sponsored by theater owners who, fearing competition, advertised the
initiative as guaranteeing "free television" and eliminating the specter of "pay
television." Both 1964 initiatives were later overturned by the courts as
unconstitutional.
The California initiative process gave rise to a new
breed of campaign professional: the paid petition circulator. With signature
requirements doubling nearly every decade, citizen groups were unable to rely
solely on volunteer effort. As early as World War I, Joseph Robinson was
offering his organizing services to initiative proponents. His firm, which paid
its employees a fee for each signature brought in, had a virtual monopoly on the
petition business from 1920 to 1948 - a period during which, Robinson estimated,
his firm was involved in 98 percent of the successful statewide initiative
petition drives. Robinson stayed in business into the late 1960s, when he
offered his services to Ed and Joyce Koupal, but by then he had competitors.
One of California's most famous initiatives was Prop
13. "On June 6th, 1978, nearly two-thirds of California's voters passed
Proposition 13, reducing property
tax by about 57%. Prior to Proposition 13 property taxes were out of control.
People were losing their homes because they could not pay their property taxes.
Yet, government did nothing to help them. In the finest tradition of the Boston
Tea Party, California taxpayers stood up and said no more to excessive taxes.
The Proposition 13 Revolution swept the country and made headlines around the
world. It began a change of thinking about the tax burden taxpayers had to bear.
Proposition 13 also started a revolution in the people turning to the initiative
process to gain a greater control over their lives." The above account, provided
by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association,
points out correctly that the modern day movement to utilize the initiative
process was brought about by the passage of Prop 13.
In the last decade, Californians lead the nation in
numerous reform efforts utilizing the initiative process including term limits, ending bilingual education,
adopting animal protection laws, ending racial preferences, and adopting one of
the most comprehensive drug reform measures in the country. This has lead to
elected officials across the country vilifying the initiative process and have
used the rhetoric “we don’t want to be like California” as their rallying cry in
opposing the initiative process. They are concerned that the reforms adopted in
California would come to their states – even though these are the reforms wanted
by the people. However, Californians still overwhelmingly support the initiative
process and have no desire for it to be abolished.
This state history is based on research found in
David Schmidt's book, Citizen Lawmakers: The Ballot Initiative Revolution
and by research conducted by the Initiative & Referendum Institute.
|