Taking the Initiative: Direct Legislation and Direct Democracy in the 1980s

Abstract

The last decade has seen a resurgence in interest in three direct democracy devices—the initiative, the popular referendum and the recall. These processes reflect the Progressive Era reformers' aim of enlarging the role of citizens and voters as well as restricting or checking the power of intermediary institutions such as state and local legislatures, political parties, and elected executives. The focus of this article is to examine the increased use of the initiative and popular referendum at the state level as well as how the process actually works. The related processes of the recall and teledemocracy are addressed in other articles in this symposium.Statewide Provisions for Initiative, Popular Referendum and RecallThe initiative process permits petitioners to write and, if a sufficient number of valid signatures are gathered, place those proposals on the ballot. The initiative can be placed directly on the ballot (the direct initiative); or before the legislature. If the legislature does not enact the measure or otherwise satisfy the sponsors of the initiative, the sponsors can gather additional signatures and place their proposal on the ballot (the indirect initiative). Five times as many states have the direct initiative as the indirect and, in states that permit both, proponents typically prefer to go directly to the ballot.

Defiant Innovation: The Adoption of Medical Marijuana Laws in the American States

“…This was the case not only during the conservative Bush administration, but also after the Obama administration implicitly signaled greater openness to these programs. Early adoptions via the initiative gave way to a mixture of legislative and initiative adoptions, thus corroborating the legitimizing effect of the popular initiative (Magleby, ).…”

The evolution of citizen and stakeholder engagement in Canada, from Spicer to #Hashtags

“…Though occasionally resisted by policy elites, and mitigated by the complexity of policy problems, the 20 th century saw a general movement towards the participation of ordinary citizens in governance, supported through legislation establishing the right of the public to participate in policymaking. Developments include electoral voting as the primary means for influencing public policy, collective decision techniques such as referendums (Leduc ), initiative and recall legislation (Magleby ), judicial interpretation and limits placed on government authority (Larkins ), local co‐management arrangements and community councils (Berkes ), and checks on administrative and executive power through institutions and legislation such as auditors general, ombudsmen offices, conflict of interest legislation, judicial review of administrative decisions, and freedom of information legislation (Hodge and Coghill ). Additional examples included multi‐party exercises such as budget consultations, deliberative conferences, consensus conferences, town hall meetings, environmental impact assessment processes, land use planning forums, and commissions of inquiry, each of which provided citizens and stakeholders with opportunities to contribute to policymaking (Dietz and Stern ; Dryzek ; Fishkin ).…”

Do Candidate Positions Matter?

“…Although considerable descriptive evidence has been offered for the influence of ballot measures over election outcomes (e.g., Magleby, 1988), researchers are just beginning to investigate the relationship between ballot measures, voter support of these measures, and gubernatorial vote choice (Alvarez & Butterfield, 2000;Nicholson, 2005). For scholars interested in the influence of issues on candidate vote choice, ballot measures provide a fertile testing ground (Bowler & Donovan, 1994;Magleby, 1988).…”

“…For scholars interested in the influence of issues on candidate vote choice, ballot measures provide a fertile testing ground (Bowler & Donovan, 1994;Magleby, 1988). The ballot measure explicitly defines the policy, and there is often an active campaign for and against the measure.…”