|
Process Available
Initiative
Referendum
Legislative
Elections Division
Initiatives
(1912-2000)
Steps to
Undertake an Initiative Campaign
Constitutional and Statutory Provisions
Additional Links
Hastings Voter Pamphlet Archive
Howard
Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Public Policy Institute of California |
California
The initiative and referendum are
available at the state level and in every city. The state-level initiative and
referendum were adopted in 1911. San Francisco and Vallejo were the first cities
to adopt the initiative in 1898, and California counties were given initiative
rights in 1893.
Progressive-era Governor Hiram Johnson is well
known for leading the
successful fight for direct democracy in the Golden State, the critical groundwork laid by Dr. John Randolph Haynes
may have been as important. 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 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 the city. Haynes used this strategic position to ensure 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. These legislators worked for
a bill to require the nomination of party candidates through primary election
rather than 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 sweeping changes in the state's government. Among these were
adoption of the 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.
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.
California's most famous initiative was Proposition
13, approved by voter in 1978. Proposition 13 capped property taxes at 1 percent
of value and limited assessment increases. It sparked a so-called tax-revolt
across the country that ran for almost a decade, and also led to a revival in
initiative use across the country as citizens increasingly turned to the initiative
process to gain a greater control over their lives.
In recent decades, Californian has led the nation in
high profile initiatives. California initiatives have allowed voters to express
their views on wide variety of important social, economic, and governmental
issues including term limits, bilingual education, racial
preferences/affirmative action, medical marijuana, punishment for crimes, taxes,
government debt, and same-sex marriage. Elected officials in other parts of the
country sometimes vilify the initiative process by saying, “we don’t want to be like California.”
Despite the view from outside (and in some cases inside) the state that the
initiative process has been a problem for state government, the process remains
overwhelmingly popular among the electorate. Defenders note as well that
California is not the only state to face economic and fiscal problems, and that
many of the problematic policies were passed by the legislature not by
initiatives.
|