Allowing for citizen referendums could improve Texas lawmaking

Voters this month added 11 amendments to the Texas Constitution. With these changes, our state’s governing document now has 467 amendments. Our Constitution already is one of the longest in the country, and many of the provisions that have been added over the years have little reason to have been included.

Many of the issues addressed in constitutional amendments could very easily be handled through simple legislation. But on controversial issues, lawmakers might want the people to make their preferences known. Or they can simply be loath to cast votes that might be used against them in the next election campaign. Regardless of the motive, they feel the need to put provisions on the constitutional ballot, because that’s the only way Texas voters can directly make their opinions known.

This wouldn’t be necessary if voters had the option of initiative and referendum.

According to the Initiative & Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California, 27 states have some form of citizen legislative process; more than half of America’s people live in those states.

The process is extremely popular where it is allowed. Proponents note that it provides a valuable check on the legislature’s power to enact unpopular laws.

A good example is in the state of California, where the assembly often passes legislation that spends more of taxpayers’ money, while many citizen referendums limit the state’s ability to spend it.

Some see that conflict as a drawback of the system; they say it makes the lawmaking process less efficient. However, our Founders intended the process to be deliberative, not efficient; they saw the need for all proposals to be addressed as thoroughly as possible, to lessen the likelihood that bad laws might be enacted.

Critics also claim that the people already have a voice in government when they elect their various representatives. Most people know better than to believe that. Legislators deal with a wide range of issues, and a majority of voters choose the least imperfect of the candidates, even if those candidates take some stances that individual voters might not support. Some people do vote on single issues, but most vote for those who with whom they agree on the largest number of issues.

The initiative process, then, acts to complement lawmakers’ actions by enabling the people to vote on specific issues.

To be sure, the system is no more perfect than lawmaking by the legislature. Special interest groups can rouse public support for specific issues and get them on the ballot, and launch promotional campaigns to draw votes to their cause. But is that much different from the same groups successfully lobbying legislators to enact similar measures in the state capitol?

In Texas, initiative and referendum would give the people a valuable tool to garner statewide votes on measures for which support is sufficient to get them on the ballot. Voters can then decide on those issues with a simple yes-or-no vote.

This would leave our Constitution for the more fundamental issues of governance, and keep it from becoming even more cumbersome and convoluted.