The Ballot Initiative Process in California Doesn’t Have to be Junked: It Can Be Reformed

Problem: Large contributions, wealthy individuals and high spending organizations dominate elections, stripping initiatives of their grassroots origins. One recent California election cost over $330 million, and wealthy contributors of $1 million or more gave two-thirds of all monies received by initiative committees. . Escalating campaign costs squeeze out citizen initiatives and allow large financial interests to dominate the initiative circulation, qualification and campaign processes.

Recommendation: CGS recommends that a high $100,000 limit be placed on all contributions to ballot measure committees, thereby substantially reducing the impact of large, often multi-million dollar contributors. CGS also recommends that ballot initiative committees controlled by candidates or elected officials not be able to raise contributions in excess of the limits for those specific candidates or elected officials.

Voter Information

Problem: Ballot pamphlets and the Secretary of State’s website are important sources of voter information, but they do not communicate that information effectively. Voters find current sources of voter information misleading and confusing. The Internet and video-on-demand are not used effectively.
Recommendation: CGS recommends that the Secretary of State’s Office “bring voter information into the YouTube Age.” It should allow proponents and opponents of ballot measures to record short video statements and place them on the Secretary of State’s website. The Secretary of State should also improve the readability and graphics of the voter’s pamphlet.

Circulation

Problem: Ballot initiatives are too easy to qualify with money and too difficult to quality by grassroots and volunteer organizations. Anyone with $1 to $2 million can qualify virtually any initiative, yet grassroots organizations find qualification within the required 150 days—among the shortest circulation period of any state—too difficult.

Recommendation: CGS recommends that California’s circulation process be extended from 150 to 365 days, bringing it in line with many other states. This would give grassroots organizations more time to circulate initiatives, yet it would not affect wealthier interests, since they can qualify measures in virtually any period.

Other reforms and recommendations can be found in the report.

Bob Stern was named Center for Governmental StudiesPresident in 2000. He has served as General Counsel of CGS since its founding in 1983. He has co-authored a number of CGS reports in the areas of campaign finance reform, the initiative process, and electronic filing of disclosure statements. Before joining CGS, he was General Counsel of the California Fair Political Practices Commission for nine years. He has authored a number of statewide initiatives enacted by California voters, including the Political Reform Act of 1974.