The Citizen Initiative: Giving the People a Voice

July 5, 2000

What can the ordinary citizen do when the legislature refuses to address a burning issue despite widespread public support?

Or when the legislature passes something so disagreeable that a large number of citizens are certain that the measure would be voted down if only it could be put to a popular vote?

The citizen can write letters to the editor, join an advocacy organization, get involved in a party or campaign, petition a resolution on the town meeting warning, and nail "No Trespassing" signs on trees. The two things the citizen can't do are a) vote on the issue and b) force the legislature to vote on this issue.

In at least 21 other states citizens are better off, thanks to a citizen initiative process. In the direct version, typified by California and Oregon, a group of voters can petition a proposal directly onto a statewide ballot. If the voters give the proposal a majority, it becomes law.

In the indirect version, used in Massachusetts and Maine, citizens petition the legislature to act first. The legislature may change the wording before putting the measure out to the voters for final approval.

The citizen initiative has been a powerful tool for popular government. In Maine, a 1977 initiative overturned that state's fledgling statewide property tax. The following year California's Proposition 13 limited increases in property taxes. In 1996 California voters adopted Proposition 209, which put an end to racial preferences by state government institutions. A number of states have used the initiative to impose term limits on their legislators.

This powerful tool of popular democracy has its critics. The most telling criticism is that ill-informed voters, under the influence of slick, expensive PR blitzes, can adopt as law poorly conceived proposals that would never survive better informed consideration by a legislative body. In addition, it is possible to have two or more incompatible proposals on the same election ballot, leading to conflicting results if more than one proposal is approved. As the Burlington Free Press once put it, the direct initiative amounts to "rule by mob". Elected officials tend to dislike the initiative of any kind because the direct version places popular limits on their powers, and the indirect version forces them to cast votes on politically dangerous issues.

There is, however, another type of initiative that avoids much of this criticism: the indirect advisory initiative. It gives the voters the power to force the legislature to act on an issue.

The direct initiative can only be achieved through a constitutional amendment. The indirect advisory initiative requires only a statute. Such a statute has been proposed in several recent Vermont bills. The 1997 version (H. 194) was sponsored by Rep. Gary Richardson (R-Weathersfield) and 13 other Republicans, plus Progressive Rep. Terry Bouricius of Burlington. It had these provisions:

1. Before June 1 of election year a citizens group of at least 25 registered voters may apply to the Secretary of State to place a measure on the general election ballot.

2. The group then proceeds to collect petition signatures from voters equal in number to five percent of those who voted for Governor in the previous election (about 12,000).

3. If the signatures are sufficient to qualify the measure, it is put before the voters for approval.

4. If approved by a majority in the election, the House chosen in that same election is required to vote on the measure within 20 days of convening in the following January. If the proposal, with or without amendment, receives a majority in the House, it is sent to the Senate for similar fast track consideration. Differences between House- and Senate-approved versions are settled through a conference committee, as with other legislation.

5. The final measure approved by both chambers is sent to the governor for approval or veto.

The legislature might pass the language of the original proposal, or an amended version, or vote the whole thing down. Each legislator would, however, know the sentiments of his constituents on the issue, which were expressed on the same election ballot on which the legislator was elected. A legislator would obviously vote against their clearly expressed will at his or her own political peril.

Obviously different people have different subjects in mind for the citizens initiative. It could be used for such issues as:

• imposing term limits
• restoring or prohibiting the death penalty
• legalizing or prohibiting gay marriage
• decommissioning Vermont Yankee
• decriminalizing marijuana
• repealing the statewide property tax (Act 60)
• repealing the heavy cutting law (Act 15)
• reforming civil forfeiture laws

Unlike the direct initiative, where the voters make law on election day, the indirect advisory initiative gives the legislature ten weeks after election day to deal responsibly with possible problems. What it does not do is allow legislators to duck the issues the people want them to address.

The citizen initiative, one form or another of which has become a fixture in almost half of the states, has never met with legislative favor in Vermont. But controversies on any of several current hot issues may well provide the impetus for legislative consideration of a citizen initiative bill. More and more Vermonters seem to believe that the people ought to have a right to, at the very least, force their elected representatives to vote on issues important to them.