There is a rush to place initiatives on next fall's ballot and, if they make it that far, the complex issues being proposed - tax policy, education funding and transportation to name a few - will be simplified to a simple yes-or-no decision.
There is an inherent danger in that, as many Californians learned from Proposition 13. Passed in 1978, the initiative was touted as a way to cut property taxes and curb skyrocketing tax bills. Taxes were indeed cut but, in the aftermath, school funding plummeted, as did the state's once top-notch reputation for quality education.
In recent years initiatives have proliferated in Nevada. Last week the board of directors of the Nevada State Education Association, the teachers union, voted to pursue an initiative to raise the gaming tax as a way to increase education funding. It is the most recent in a line of proposals that are expected to make the ballot , including:
These are all far-reaching policy issues that need to be debated, but initiative elections shouldn't be the way to decide them.
Initiatives certainly play a role in our representative democracy as the voters' ultimate check on government, but they were never intended to be a regular occurrence, much less a way to make complex policy. Policy should be debated and decided by the governor and the Legislature.
But for years state leaders have pushed off making tough decisions on issues such as taxes. The net effect is that the state has been crippled by a lack of money for necessities such as education and highway construction.
As a result of this abdication of responsibility, the state's future largely may be determined by special interest groups with enough money to subvert a political process intended to give citizens a voice. That is a shame.
archive