Commentary By Representative Mike Ball

Published in The Birmingham News December 26, 2004

[but not in their online edition]

It’s Time for Alabama to Adopt the Initiative Process

             It doesn’t take a political scientist to sense the swelling distrust and disillusionment toward the political process in 

Alabama.  

            Many citizens believe the legislature is controlled by big-moneyed special interests having little concern for the 

common person with every day struggles.

             It is within this context that I believe it is time for Alabamians to consider implementing a reasonable version of 

the ballot initiative. When there is statewide support for an initiative, citizens should have the option to call for a vote. 

The initiative process is not a cure-all for Alabama’s problems, nor should it utilized to replace the legislative process.  In his address to the 1912 Ohio constitutional convention Theodore Roosevelt told delegates, “the initiative and referendum should be used, not as substitutes for representative government, but as methods of making such government really representative. Action by the initiative or referendum ought not to be the normal way of legislation; but the power to take it should be provided in the constitution, so that if the representatives fail truly to represent the people on some matter of sufficient importance to rouse popular interest, then the people shall have in their hands the facilities to make good the failure.”  Inspired by Roosevelt, Ohio delegates implemented the initiative process.

Also inspired by Roosevelt, I am proposing that Alabama implement an initiative process that would require general public support across the state, limit the number of measures on the ballot, and give the legislature the opportunity to act before an issue is placed on the ballot.  Properly implemented, the initiative process could provide motivation for legislative action on issues that have popular support, but heavy special interest opposition.  Because it would be difficult to stop a ballot measure with broad public support, it is virtually assured that my modest initiative proposal will draw strong opposition from those who are content with business as usual in Montgomery.

Twenty-four states allow their citizens the opportunity to place proposals on the ballot to be decided upon by a majority vote, but opponents of the process usually refer to California when citing the reasons for their opposition.  In most states, the process works fine; but California has several problems with the process.  A well-crafted law can easily avoid these pitfalls.     

Only 5% of those who voted in the last gubernatorial race are needed to place a statutory measure on the California ballot, while only 8% are needed for a constitutional amendment.  This low signature threshold is exacerbated by the lack of a geographical distribution requirement.  Sponsors of a ballot initiative in California need not leave the San Francisco and the Los Angeles area to get enough signatures.  The bill I am proposing has a threshold of 7% for statutes, 10% for constitutional amendments, with geographical distribution of signatures totaling at least 1% of previous gubernatorial voters from each congressional district.  Because the large number of initiatives on California’s ballot can be confusing to the voter, I am also proposing that no more than two initiatives per regular session of the legislature reach the ballot in Alabama.

Whether candidates will admit it or not, debate during a campaign for political office revolves around personalities and general political party philosophy; however, when an initiative is on the ballot, debate revolves around issues.  An open, reasonable initiative process does not undermine the ability of the legislature to represent the people, but it empowers the legislative process by encouraging the discussion and debate of meaningful issues.  By trusting the people of Alabama with access to the initiative process, the legislature would be moving a long way toward gaining the credibility needed to effectively address the problems facing our state.

Mike Ball

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

COMMENT FROM DR. I.Q.

Mike Ball represents House District 10 in the Alabama Legislature. Both he and Representative Blaine Galliher [House District 30] introduced Initiative and Referendum [I&R] bills during the 2004 regular session of the legislature. The bills were assigned to [14th district representative, and House Majority Leader] Ken Guin’s Constitution and Elections Committee. These bills, HB88 [Galliher] and HB579 [Ball], failed to get out of committee for consideration by the full House of Representatives.

 

When Governor Riley later called a Special Session, Representative Ball introduced another I&R bill as HB32. However, no action was taken on it because it had not been included in the Governor’s call, and would have taken a likely unattainable  amount of support from too many reluctant legislators to be considered.

 

In the 2005 regular session, Ball and Senator "Ted" Little [Senate District 27] introduced identical bills authored by Ball  as HB276 in the house and SB253 in the upper chamber. Ball's bill  was approved unanimously by the House Constitution and Elections Committee after a long delay, and too late for it to go to the floor of the house for open debate. Little's bill was not even ever assigned to a committee, to the best of my knowledge. A copy of HB276 can be read by scrolling down to the last portion of http://www.doctoriq.com/HB276.htm.

 

I hope and expect, a similar, even if not exactly the same, bill to be introduced early in the 2006 regular session, starting on January 10. 

 

Pressure on legislators of both the Senate and the House of Representatives from the voters of Alabama is the only way we will ever have a chance for the necessary reform and accountability measures in our government. 

 

Home          Formulary          Contact Dr. I.Q.