Taking the initiative

Though an independent, Gov. Angus King probably didn’t win many friends this week among those frustrated by lawmakers in the two major parties. His opinion, however, that Maine should make it more difficult for activists to place referendum questions on the ballot is on target and should start a broader discussion on the growing use of direct initiatives.

Citizen initiatives were supposed to be rare things when they were envisioned a century ago – an emergency action taken when representative government became incapable of acting in the public’s interest. And indeed, until recently that’s how they were used. In the 30 years before 1970, Maine had a single referendum question on the ballot; in the 30 years since, there have been 33; nine of those came in the last five years. You might blame on dissatisfaction with government or more active citizen groups. David Broder, the Washington Post columnist who last year published a book on the subject called “Democracy Derailed,” sees another cause: money.

“Like so many other aspects of American politics,” he writes, “the initiative process has become big business. Lawyers, campaign consultants and signature-gathering firms see each election cycle as an opportunity to make money on initiatives that, in many cases, only a handful of people are pushing. Records from the 1998 election cycle … show that more than $250 million was raised and spent in this largely uncontrolled and unexamined arena of politics.”

As an example, Mr. Broder uses the issue of medical marijuana, which has been considered in a dozen states in the last couple of years and was supported in Maine in 1999. In at least five western states, however, passage of the measure wasn’t based on grass-roots support or demand by patients who needed the drug. Mr. Broder reports that three men, including billionaire financier George Soros, who didn’t like the nation’s “war on drugs,” personally contributing three-fourths of the $1.5 million raised in Arizona alone to pass the initiative.

Maine has seen plenty of national issues in addition to medical marijuana come its way, from abortion and gay rights to Death with Dignity and term limits. Even if the issue raised is an important one and worth supporting, it suffers from the lack of legislative process that allows for amendments, modifications unique to Maine that its drafters had not considered and the forum for debate that requires lawmakers to devote at least some time to consider the pros and cons.

When initiatives are rare, these shortcomings sometimes can be outweighed by the necessity of the citizens to go around the checks and balances of government.

When they are frequent it is unlikely that these issues are so dire that they must override the spirit of the Constitution. Toughening the standards for getting an issue on the ballot is a reasonable reaction to the growing sophistication and resources of interest groups. The state Constitution requires voters who want to place a referendum question on the ballot to collect signatures from at least 10 percent of the voters who cast ballots in the last gubernatorial election, which currently means 42,101.

The governor suggested that the total number of signatures could be increased, a requirement be established so that each of Maine’s 16 counties contribute a set percentage of signatures or that organizers be barred from collecting signatures at polling places. The Legislature has rejected these ideas in the last few years, but the governor should consider submitting one or all of them again for consideration. Just as long as he doesn’t try to start a citizen’s initiative on the issue.