Though the initiative course of — proposing new legal guidelines by way of poll measures — has been in California’s structure for greater than a century, its use was pretty unusual till the Seventies.
There have been simply 9 initiatives positioned earlier than voters within the Sixties, the bottom utilization of any decade. The quantity jumped to 22 within the Seventies, together with such game-changing measures as Proposition 20, 1972’s coastal safety act, and Proposition 13, the state’s iconic tax limitation, in 1978.
The variety of initiatives going through voters in every election cycle continued to climb, reaching an apogee of 70 within the first decade of this century earlier than declining a bit to 51 within the 2010s.
Prop. 13 not solely exemplifies how the initiative grew to become California’s single strongest policymaking instrument however how opponents of proposed measures have tried to make use of countermeasures. By making huge adjustments in how authorities providers are financed, significantly public faculties, Prop. 13 offended the state Capitol’s political figures, together with then-Gov. Jerry Brown, who denounced it as “a ripoff.”
Hoping to undermine assist for Prop. 13, Brown and legislators hurriedly positioned another measure on the poll, Proposition 8, which might have decreased property taxes on properties however would haven’t benefited industrial property.
The ploy failed miserably. Prop. 13 handed with 65% of the votes forged within the June 6, 1978, main election whereas Prop. 8 did not get even 50%. Afterward Brown, who was operating for a second time period that yr, did a 180-degree political pirouette and declared himself a “born-again tax cutter.”
Though the countermeasure tactic failed in 1978, it has been employed sometimes because the variety of initiatives continued to rise.
The 2022 election, as an example, featured two competing measures to legalize wagering on sports activities, Proposition 26, sponsored by California’s casino-owning Indian tribes, and Proposition 27, a rival backed by huge on-line gaming pursuits. Regardless of lots of of thousands and thousands of {dollars} being spent by the contesting pursuits, voters rejected each.
This yr, after legislation enforcement teams certified Proposition 36, which might enhance penalties for some crimes, Gov. Gavin Newsom tried to trend a competing measure that might be much less harsh, however he finally ran out of time.
Nonetheless this yr’s poll does provide one other instance of competing measures, this time over lease management, albeit with a brand new twist.
Michael Weinstein, who heads the Los Angeles-based AIDS Healthcare Basis, has twice spent thousands and thousands of {dollars} on measures to repeal California’s three-decade-old legislation that limits the power of native governments to impose controls on residential rents. Each, one in 2018 and one other in 2020, have been rejected by voters after the California Condo Affiliation and different actual property teams spent thousands and thousands of {dollars} on opposition campaigns.
Weinstein is again for a 3rd time this yr with Proposition 33. However along with financing one other opposition drive, the condo affiliation has certified Proposition 34, which might require “prescription drug price manipulators” — organizations that purchase and distribute discounted medication via a federal program — to spend no less than 98% of their revenues on affected person care.
The condo affiliation says its “dual campaigns aim to defeat both Weinstein’s current rent control measure and prevent him from misusing taxpayer dollars to fund rent control campaigns in the future.”
Weinstein and his supporters cry foul and tried to influence the California Supreme Court docket to invalidate Prop. 34. The court docket refused, although it indicated it would revisit the measure’s validity if it passes.
Nonetheless this duel performs out, it’s a brand new wrinkle in California’s perennial clashes of particular curiosity gladiators within the poll enviornment, one that can proceed to check voters’ skill to discern motives behind propositions.
