California and Non-Stop Elections

The delay of the California recall election is both good news and bad. It's good news because it's likely to increase the chance of the No-on-Recall vote. This recall is a frivolous use of the recall tool by the Republicans just because they didn't like the results of last year's Governor's election. A solid "No" vote would discourage repetitions of the tactic.

But a delay until March also means that the election campaign will go on for another six months. Permanent fund-raising is bad enough. Permanent elections are even worse.

California is famous for its initiative process. And the recall has reminded us dramatically of another "direct democracy" tool put in place by the Progressive movement a century ago. The problem is that democracy without responsibility can erode the general welfare as seriously as the corruption that the Progressives meant to combat - not least because the power of concentrated wealth can influence statewide initative votes just as it can legislative elections. As economist Laura Tyson points out:

The recall demonstrates that the toxic brew of money's influence in politics and the direct-democracy provisions of California's constitution have rendered the state ungovernable. As a result of several voter initaitives, about 70% of state spending is earmarked in advance, limiting the discretion necessary to make trade-offs in a crisis. In addition, California is one of only two states mandating a two-thirds supermajority of both legislative bodies to pass a budget. Even in normal times in a state as vast and diverse as California, the supermajority constraint gives an ideological minority effective veto power. Finally, compulsory six-to-eight-year term limits for California legislators - the result of another voter initiative - further undermine the budgetary process. Many legislators simply do not understand budgetary trade-offs and can esily fall prey to lobbyists.

In other words, we the people pass a lot of restrictions mandating how elected officials can govern. But when things go wrong, we don't blame ourselves, the public. We blame "the politicians" (as though it wasn't us that elect them!) and pass more restrictions. Tyson's conclusion: "California doesn't need a recall election. It doesn't need a celebrity governor. It needs an economic rebound and a new constitution."

Tags: california recall, laura tyson