by frog
Following the bundle of referenda ‘lost’ by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on Wednesday, Reuters report Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein as saying:
“The election results should send a strong message that the voters are tired of having issues that should be solved by their elected representatives placed before them on the ballot.”
That’s not something you would hear in New Zealand and its worth reflecting that that is probably a good thing.
Calls for more voter power through citizen-initiated referenda are often based on the presumption that people will so value the opportunity to ‘take back the power’ that they will embrace, and therefore strengthen the legitimacy of, the whole exercise.
But the reality of too many ballots can be seen in California, where the frequency of both citizen and government-initiated ballots, has turned people right off the whole process. Feinstein’s challenge above explains why; the voters of California elect their legislators to make the decisions, in part, because it means they don’t have to worry about such things themselves.
The New Zealand experience is, of course, different because we have far fewer referenda. Here, there are regular calls for contentious issues to be ‘put to the people’.
The Green Party general position on referenda (we don’t yet have a policy) is that they should only be used rarely because they are a very blunt, easily-mistargeted instrument.
We have also argued that referenda should only be used when the outcome affects everyone equally. So a popular vote on, say, electoral reform is appropriate because, whatever the result, everyone will be equally affected.
By comparison, decisions that only really affect the rights of a minority should not be made through a majority vote. As Jeanette said at the time of last year’s Civil Unions vote in Parliament:
“The Greens do not support Don Brash’s call for a referendum on the Civil Unions Bill. It is not appropriate to invite New Zealanders to directly vote on whether or not a minority should be entitled to their human rights and equal treatment before the law.
“Even though the polls show that a majority support the Bill and that it would win a referendum, human rights are so fundamental that they cannot be dependent on majority decision making.�
Feinstein’s call above should also be kept in mind. MPs and political parties are elected to Parliament to do a job and general elections are the common sense time and place for the voters to decide whether they have done that job well.
You only have look at the poor turnout in NZ’s local body elections to see that if the stakes are perceived as being not very high, then people won’t bother to participate. Clearly, voting is something that you can have too much of.
Published in Justice & Democracy | Parliament by frog on Fri, November 11th, 2005
Tags: environment
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
As a US citizen with strong desires to be part of the democratic process the only reason I had to vote on these stupid motions was that I would be struck off the “usual” voting register for overseas voters if I didn’t. I am so pleased my mother chose to move to NZ, MMP despitee its flaws allows me the confidence to vote for the people that I believe will vote for the beliefs I support
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Well said Clara!
I believe the World would be a safer place if the “impossible” happened and the US overhauled its voting systems …
However it’s difficult to change a system if (probably the majority of?) the people don’t realise that theirs is one “system” of many alternatives, and that it can be changed.
We can thank the foresight and effort of Rod Donald for our MMP system.
The USA would be a much harder series of very thick shelled nuts to crack!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
well said both:
and much more vested interest in the status quo in the US voting system.
thankfully, their outcomes are resistable within our framework!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Frankly, it’d probably take a revolutionary effort to overhaul the US government. But let’s not go there.
That snippet about the Green Party’s policy on referenda was very enlightening, Frog, and I have to say I agree- it is not for the lynch mob to decide whether someone is entitled to their rights. It is indeed undemocratic to allow someone to vote on something that pretty much does not affect them.
Of course, I doubt the Right would see it that way
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)