Government by the People

[Jim N]

This year voters will have their say on one of the most important pieces of legislation ever to be put to a vote in Connecticut. That is the ability of voters to directly make laws. If this piece of legislation passes it will no longer just be the elected representatives and their lobbyist friends who will make the laws we have to live under but anyone could initiate a referendum to make a law that has to be approved by a majority of voters. No longer would the citizens of CT be under the dictates of laws passed out of emotion, with no logic behind it that only benefit small but loud special interest groups or laws passed to benefit special interests that have powerful lobbies that just look out for them. The “Silent Majority” can and hopefully will have its say if this law passes.
However I see very little about it in the media and what I do see has the special interest groups pushing to insure this change does not pass.
I feel that is UNAMERICAN. Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg address called America “a government by the people, for the people, and of the people”. It seems in CT, the government, the elected representatives, the lobbyists, and the special interest groups do not feel that a government run by the people is in their best interests. Apparently they do not consider the people they control intelligent enough to know what laws and taxes they want. They are wrong. I think the legislators are scared they would become accountable for the laws and taxes they pass.
I hope this law passes and the media gets behind it to protect their right to a free press.

[flatrat]

courant.com/news/local/columnists/hc-rgreen1021.artoct21,0,1340880.column
Courant.com
'Direct Democracy' Would Mean Sheer Chaos

Rick Green

October 21, 2008

On Election Day, California voters will burrow through a pile of a dozen complicated referendum questions.

They must decide about gay marriage and teenage abortion. They will be asked to fork over for high-speed trains, cops, drug criminals, renewable energy, hospitals and veterans — with no understanding of how this might affect the budget.

This seat-of-the-pants government could come to Connecticut if the folks behind the constitutional convention vote campaign succeed.

Next month, a ballot question will ask whether we should hold a constitutional convention, which could lead to an amendment allowing these "citizen initiatives."

Supporters refer to this by the cunning name of "direct democracy."

It's more like Voters-Gone-Wild.

These days, a good portion of government in California revolves around these referendum questions and special interests pushing their various agendas. Don't like something? Forget our representative democracy — just gather signatures and start a knee-jerk campaign: Stop teacher unions! Legalize pot! Rebates for Prius drivers!

"It has voters making policy decisions in a vacuum," said Jennie Drage Bowser, a policy analyst who studies citizen initiatives for the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Voters in Connecticut should pay attention to the crafty campaign pushing to bring this referendum chicanery here. The real goal is to force their costly special agendas down our throats — again and again.

Citizen initiative, if passed, could break the state budget because proposals placed on the ballot have costly price tags. It could also ruin the budget in another way: A ballot question in Massachusetts this year proposes eliminating the state income tax, removing a third of state revenue that pays for roads, schools and police.

In Colorado, voters have approved constitutional amendments that mandate simultaneous budget cutting and increases for education. Why bother passing laws or balancing the budget if we're going to bring every important question to the voters?

According to the Initiative and Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California, the referendums increasingly are about social issues or slashing — or greatly expanding — government spending. In Colorado this fall, voters will consider 18 ballot questions.

In Arizona, they are so fed up with this direct democracy that a ballot question next month proposes restricting measures that raise taxes or require new spending. Florida has already scaled back its initiative law.

Good laws and effective government programs are achieved through informed debate and compromise, not emotional referendums that reduce the process to a yes-or-no vote. Would the Voting Rights Act have been approved in the South in 1964? I doubt it.

Meanwhile, the reality is that "special interests and the party bosses today have been very effective at using the initiative process," said Daniel Smith, a political science professor at the University of Florida who studies citizen initiatives.

A few weeks ago, the Sacramento Bee newspaper warned that "the initiative industry is out of control. ... We have initiatives on the ballot this year sponsored by out-of-state billionaires and groups that want the constitution to specify the size of chicken cages."

One of the hottest questions in California is about the size of cages for chickens and other farm animals.

Is it any surprise that California — the chaotic epicenter of direct initiative referendum voting — is verging on bankruptcy these days?

Rick Green's column appears on Tuesdays and Fridays. Read his blog at courant.com/rick.

Copyright © 2008, The Hartford Courant

[Jim N]

courant.com/news/local/columnists/hc-rgreen1021.artoct21,0,1340880.column
Courant.com
'Direct Democracy' Would Mean Sheer Chaos

Rick Green

October 21, 2008

On Election Day, California voters will burrow through a pile of a dozen complicated referendum questions.

They must decide about gay marriage and teenage abortion. They will be asked to fork over for high-speed trains, cops, drug criminals, renewable energy, hospitals and veterans — with no understanding of how this might affect the budget.

This seat-of-the-pants government could come to Connecticut if the folks behind the constitutional convention vote campaign succeed.

Next month, a ballot question will ask whether we should hold a constitutional convention, which could lead to an amendment allowing these "citizen initiatives."

Supporters refer to this by the cunning name of "direct democracy."

It's more like Voters-Gone-Wild.

These days, a good portion of government in California revolves around these referendum questions and special interests pushing their various agendas. Don't like something? Forget our representative democracy — just gather signatures and start a knee-jerk campaign: Stop teacher unions! Legalize pot! Rebates for Prius drivers!

"It has voters making policy decisions in a vacuum," said Jennie Drage Bowser, a policy analyst who studies citizen initiatives for the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Voters in Connecticut should pay attention to the crafty campaign pushing to bring this referendum chicanery here. The real goal is to force their costly special agendas down our throats — again and again.

Citizen initiative, if passed, could break the state budget because proposals placed on the ballot have costly price tags. It could also ruin the budget in another way: A ballot question in Massachusetts this year proposes eliminating the state income tax, removing a third of state revenue that pays for roads, schools and police.

In Colorado, voters have approved constitutional amendments that mandate simultaneous budget cutting and increases for education. Why bother passing laws or balancing the budget if we're going to bring every important question to the voters?

According to the Initiative and Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California, the referendums increasingly are about social issues or slashing — or greatly expanding — government spending. In Colorado this fall, voters will consider 18 ballot questions.

In Arizona, they are so fed up with this direct democracy that a ballot question next month proposes restricting measures that raise taxes or require new spending. Florida has already scaled back its initiative law.

Good laws and effective government programs are achieved through informed debate and compromise, not emotional referendums that reduce the process to a yes-or-no vote. Would the Voting Rights Act have been approved in the South in 1964? I doubt it.

Meanwhile, the reality is that "special interests and the party bosses today have been very effective at using the initiative process," said Daniel Smith, a political science professor at the University of Florida who studies citizen initiatives.

A few weeks ago, the Sacramento Bee newspaper warned that "the initiative industry is out of control. ... We have initiatives on the ballot this year sponsored by out-of-state billionaires and groups that want the constitution to specify the size of chicken cages."

One of the hottest questions in California is about the size of cages for chickens and other farm animals.

Is it any surprise that California — the chaotic epicenter of direct initiative referendum voting — is verging on bankruptcy these days?

Rick Green's column appears on Tuesdays and Fridays. Read his blog at courant.com/rick.

Copyright © 2008, The Hartford Courant

Perfect response, when you can't think for yourself quote someone who makes their money from multi national corporations. You know, the ones who own most of the media in the US and rule what makes it into the media. After Woodward and Bernstein the government and corporations made sure that would never happen again. However this just proves their brainwashing works. God forbid Americans actually have a direct say in their government, they may make mistakes, but it is our country and if you're intelligent you learn from your mistakes. I think the big problem is multinationals, lobbyists and lawmakers would lose some power and money won't go into their pockets. How many unfunded mandates does the Federal Gov dump on the states? Not to mention the ones the states dumps on the local governments. I guess since they then control whose pockets the money goes in their mandates are OK.
See what columnist can reply to this for you.

[gene36]

By letting the state decide our future Connecticut will be a billion dollars in dept next year. If we were a company we would be forced into chapter eleven bankrouptcy.
As to initiatives on the ballot, you cant just willy nilly throw amenments out there. They would be gone thru by an appointed commitee and put to a voteonly if a majority want it.
Dont let the state and the unions and the gun lobby fool you with their ads and scare tacticts.
Vote yes so at least we will have a small say in our government,God knows we couldnt do any worse.
So vote yes,and also vote anti incumbent.
-----------------------------------------

[flatrat]

Perfect response, when you can't think for yourself quote someone who makes their money from multi national corporations. You know, the ones who own most of the media in the US and rule what makes it into the media. After Woodward and Bernstein the government and corporations made sure that would never happen again. However this just proves their brainwashing works. God forbid Americans actually have a direct say in their government, they may make mistakes, but it is our country and if you're intelligent you learn from your mistakes. I think the big problem is multinationals, lobbyists and lawmakers would lose some power and money won't go into their pockets. How many unfunded mandates does the Federal Gov dump on the states? Not to mention the ones the states dumps on the local governments. I guess since they then control whose pockets the money goes in their mandates are OK.
See what columnist can reply to this for you.

Ok Jimbo,
In my own words:

The CT Constitution (http://www.sots.ct.gov/sots/cwp/view.asp?a=3188&q=392288) predates the American Constitution. Like the American Constitution which was modeled after CT, it is a very unique document.

I go by the theory of, "If it aint broke, dont fix it."

Yes, the political process may be broke, but our constitution isnt. I would think twice, maybe three times, before I opened such a special document to be gutted by a bunch of extremist agendas and special interest group whackos, all pushing their own distorted versions of reality.

I will be voting no on the question of "shall we muck up our constitution?" I prefer we work within the framework set forth by our wise founding fathers, in all their wisdom. It has served us well so far, as has the US Constitution, which we may get back when Bush retires on 1/20/09.

Jim, whats your angle on voting yes?

Don't tell me you dont have an angle or an agenda! Is gay marriage upsetting you?

[Jim N]

Ok Jimbo,
In my own words:

The CT Constitution (http://www.sots.ct.gov/sots/cwp/view.asp?a=3188&q=392288) predates the American Constitution. Like the American Constitution which was modeled after CT, it is a very unique document.

I go by the theory of, "If it aint broke, dont fix it."

Yes, the political process may be broke, but our constitution isnt. I would think twice, maybe three times, before I opened such a special document to be gutted by a bunch of extremist agendas and special interest group whackos, all pushing their own distorted versions of reality.

I will be voting no on the question of "shall we muck up our constitution?" I prefer we work within the framework set forth by our wise founding fathers, in all their wisdom. It has served us well so far, as has the US Constitution, which we may get back when Bush retires on 1/20/09.

Jim, whats your angle on voting yes?

Don't tell me you dont have an angle or an agenda! Is gay marriage upsetting you?
Does anarchy count as an angle or agenda.
Seriously I am so tired of watching our government giving away America. As you put so politely "the political process may be broke" I would take out the word "maybe" and wouldn't put it politely. We broke with a monarchy and aristocracy in 1776 and it worked for a while, though they say "power corrupts" and what I see happening is the building of an aristocracy and political family dynasties. It appears most politicians get elected for life and then hand down their office to family members our illustrious Dodd and MA's Kennedy's pop right into mind. Even if they don't stay in office they get a better retirement after 1 term then citizens get after working 50 years and then they go on to sell the influence and connections they delveloped in office as consultants or lobbyist. Still ruling and controlling us serfs. I thought that they were suppose to be our public SERVANTS or our employees not the other way around. You and anyone out there who takes the time to thinks about it can come up with plenty more examples of this. I don't think myself, you or anyone out there knows how to fix it. Maybe we need to tear it down and try again. I believe in the Declaration of Independence it says words to the effect 'that if the government that was set up does not meet the needs of the people it is not only their right but their duty to alter or abolish it and institute in it's place such safeguards as they deem necessary'. Since it appears those in who's hands we have put our lives and freedoms have misused this power, it maybe time for the people to re-claim some of that power and being able to initiate new laws without having to pay a lobbyist maybe one way to start.
I would vote for gay marriage. That's for another post.

[S_Meriden60]

I'm very skeptical about changing out state constitution. The way to change things is to vote the people out of office and replace them.
The problem is we never seem to vote out the bums that do not work for us.
We also have to remember that we do not live in a pure democratic society.
We live in a republic.
Allowing a change in the Connecticut constitution could open a can of worms.
Look at our own town and I'll use the new football field as an example. I’m sure I’ll get flamed for this.
A large group of mostly football teams and coaches went to the council meeting and pressured the city into building a new field in a time of fiscal constraints. While I am not against having a new field, I felt that the timing was poor given the budget problems with the city and state.
Sure enough, when it came time to work on the city budget, they had to reduce the increase the Board of Education wanted. The board turned around and threatened to cut sports and other programs. What good would a new field be if no teams existed to play on it?
My point is, I'm sure there are a great number (silent majority) of Meriden citizens that didn't want the field built at a time when both city and state are in the red.
Would they dare go to city hall that night and speak against the field? A few brave ones did.
So, by allowing citizens to add bills or laws they want on a voting ballot can be dangerous. Look at the other states that have done so and the results were not pretty. Wanting something and having the money to pay for it are two different things.
The Connecticut constitution is a good document. Leave it be. Not happy with your current representatives? GO VOTE THEM OUT!
No special interest group can beat us if WE ALL VOTE.