What's so Democratic About Taking Initiative?

In his book Democratic Delusions: The Initiative Process in America (2002), Richard J. Ellis not only describes the initiative process, but he also highlights its strengths and weaknesses. The most important question addressed by Ellis is "is the initiative process a truly democratic device, or does it actually cause harm to the 'democracy' of the government of the United States?" In turn, Ellis' text leads the reader to wonder whether democracy, from an American perspective, really means government by the people, and if the initiative is in fact a true form of citizen involvement in lawmaking.

In theory, the concept of citizen-initiated law is a commendable one. Initiatives put the law directly into the citizens' hands by allowing them to propose laws to fellow citizens - laws that may otherwise be overlooked by representatives. Ellis quotes Woodrow Wilson: [Direct legislation was not "a substitute for representative institutions, but only...a means of stimulation and control...a sobering means of obtaining genuine representative action on the part of legislative bodies" (Ellis 33). It acts as an additional "check" in our federalist system.

In the initiative process, a citizen writes a law, must file the proposal with the government, and then must obtain a specified number of signatures from citizens in order for the initiative to appear on the ballot. Once written on the ballot, it is up to voters whether or not to approve the initiative.

In Chapter One, Ellis describes the initiative process of Helen Hill - an ordinary citizen who wanted to make a law that affected her personally. As Ellis states, Hill was not politically well educated, nor did she have the funds and political power that some initiative proponents have, but her initiative still passed with a fifty-seven percent voter approval. However, Ellis is careful to make clear that Hill's case is a rare one, and that most initiatives are passed not because well-meaning citizens volunteer to help petition for them, but because people are paid to advocate the initiative.

In his coverage of the criticisms of the initiative, Ellis is careful to address some problems with the aptly titled "business of signatures" Chapter Three. Originally, initiatives were supposed to be passed as a result of the will and determination of citizens who care enough about the cause to volunteer to gather signatures from the population. However, it has become customary for the main proponents of the initiative to hire signature gatherers. This leads to stunning costs, well over one hundred thousand dollars, just to obtain the required number of signatures. Most signature gatherers receive a certain amount of money for each signature, which drives them to obtain more signatures.

While in some ways the business of gathering signatures may seem rather harmless, there are some major problems associated with the idea. For instance, the average citizen cannot afford to hire a signature gatherer, and so, his initiative may never get to the ballot due to a lack of signatures. The more money the initiative requires to appear on a ballot, the less democratic the process becomes. The purpose of the initiative is to allow ordinary citizens to have a hand in law making, but ordinary citizens do not have the funds to successfully pass an initiative.

Some of the first proponents of the initiative, such as James W. Sullivan and Henry Loucks, who lived in the late nineteenth century, believed that a system of direct legislation would bring social justice. According to Sullivan, "direct legislation would destroy the 'American plutocracy' " (Ellis 28). However, as is apparent through Ellis' report, the initiative process has effectively strengthened the plutocracy, or government by the wealthy.

Ellis cites cases in several states in which some legislators tried to pass restrictions concerning the signature business. One famous case addressed by Ellis is Meyer v. Grant (1998), in which paid signature gatherers were criticized by their opponents, who argued that any wealthy citizen could buy a spot on the ballot. The Supreme Court ruled that putting restrictions on paid signature gatherers infringes the First Amendment by "restricting the amount of speech that occurs during the circulation phase...and indirectly burdens speech by making it less likely that the initiative will qualify for the ballot..." (Ellis 63). Even though the Supreme Court ruled in favor of paid signature gatherers, Ellis is careful to present the problems associated with the practice, allowing the reader to decide for himself whether hiring such help is fair, or if the mercenary-like practice only causes more harm to democracy.

Other issues discussed by Ellis are: 1) the fact that the initiative process should have lessened the power of special interests groups, but because money is such an important factor in the process, special interest groups and lobbyists do play an important role in the initiative process; and 2) that once an initiative is placed on the ballot, only those citizens who bother to vote have a say in the matter.

Ellis' argument is very convincing. The argument is not blatantly designating a "positive" or "negative" status to the initiative. Instead, he shows that the intent of the initiative should be to give power to the people, but that over the century, people have manipulated the idea of the initiative to meet their personal needs, rather than to make society better and fairer. However, he also addresses the fact that in the end, because the initiative appears on the ballot, the power is still in the hands of the everyday citizens, or at least in the hands of those who bother to go to the voting booth. On the other hand, he states that any initiative deemed unconstitutional by the courts will be immediately discarded. Ellis gives sufficient reasons to persuade the reader to believe that the United States government is not a veritable democracy. As with most other proposals of political change, the court has the final say in determining the constitutionality of that change, but Ellis also shows that the common citizens can have more power than they realize.

Ellis' basic argument, that the initiative process is not truly democratic, is supported by his claim that other American institutions are not necessarily democratic, no matter how much they claim to be. For instance, in Chapter Five, he states that majority rule is the foundation of our system of government. However, he also states that the democratic value of majority rule is undermined by the bicameral legislature.

Not only does one realize that there are undemocratic factors associated with the initiative process, but also that the government of the United States in general should be scrutinized. He briefly addresses such issues by implying that the judicial branch seems to have outstanding power, which negates the idea of an equal ability of the branches to check and balance one another. After reading Ellis' book, one can assume that there are more undemocratic issues that he does not even touch upon, and also that the only way for federalism to blend with a true democracy would be if the initiative process were amended. In short, there needs to be an initiative for the initiative process. If everyday citizens could conceivably get initiatives on the ballot, without spending ridiculously large amounts of money, then we would be halfway there. The other half lies in voter turnout, which is generally less than fifty percent of the population, and is an extensive subject itself. Adding both of these factors, a large majority of American citizens do not have anything to do with initiatives until they become part of a state's law.

Ellis is very efficient in his account of events. He gives specific examples of legislation and of court cases, outlining each in detail so the reader understands clearly. Each chapter is riddled with situations in which aspects of the initiative process become questionable. In every situation, he describes the actions taken by the people involved and their reasons for taking such measures. For instance, in Chapter One, he begins recounting the history of Helen Hill's Measure 58 by describing factors in her personal life that affected her involvement in the initiative process. He also uses direct quotations from well-known people like Woodrow Wilson, as well as from lesser-known politicians, and cites judicial statements, to illustrate his points.

Overall, Ellis' book serves as an eye opener for the average citizen. Many people are not even aware of the initiative process, and Ellis' book would be a good one to read if the reader was interested in writing an initiative of his own. Ellis describes the tactics used by successful, and unsuccessful initiative advocates, and a novice initiative writer could learn quite a bit from Ellis' review of the process.

Few people realize how undemocratic the initiative process has become. On paper, the plan sounds ideal - lawmaking by the governed, in other words, democracy - but in practice initiatives are not so democratic. Ellis illustrates this point clearly. He is not totally biased, and gives attention to both the positive and negative sides of the initiative, partially leaving it up to the reader to decide whether the problems outweigh the benefits, or vice versa. However, all in all Ellis, like everyone, obviously has a problem with the state of the initiative, and of the system of government in general, in the United States today.

Work Cited

Ellis, Richard J. Democratic Delusions: The Initiative Process in America. USA: University Press of Kansas, 2002.