Posted on 11/26/2006 9:49:55 AM PST by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO — Expect surprises. It's no longer politics as usual.
Want to overhaul the Legislature into a single nonpartisan house? How about creating universal health care or a bullet train? Voters may soon get the chance.
Californians are so tired of Sacramento and Washington that they are creating a "unique hybrid democracy" to dissolve political gridlock on key issues — a trend that could spread across the nation.
That's the conclusion reached by California's two foremost pollsters, looking back to the Nov. 7 election and ahead to coming sessions of the Legislature and Congress.
Californians are backing away from the two-party machine system, voting for candidates of choice, and vigorously using initiatives.
Various interests are already pushing 14 measures for 2008 on hot-button issues ranging from political traffic jams, to immigration, to same-sex marriage.
"The unique hybrid democracy preserves the current system of elected representatives to carry out duties, but incorporates increased amounts of citizen input and oversight," said Mark Baldassare, poll director for the Bay Area-based Public Policy Institute of California.
"The two-party system is having trouble attracting new voters, adapting to the changing demography and adjusting to the increasing use of the ballot box," Baldassare said.
"Hybrid democracy may be the answer to the public's desire for populism and a solution to the parties and divisions, special-interests' influence and voter distrust that currently plague America's political process," he said.
"California could lead the way, as a nation-state, in a new political direction."
Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field Poll, agreed that "voters want some third way other than these bickering two sides."
"California politics is marching, in many ways, to a different drummer," DiCamillo said.
The most dramatic of the proposed initiatives that could wind up on a ballot in 2008 would ax the state Senate and Assembly to create a single legislative house of 50 to 80 members to be nominated and elected in a nonpartisan manner for a two-year term.
The proposal would create a minimum waiting period before a final vote on legislation and limit legislators' salary and travel costs.
Another would create a costly state-run health care system for Californians. Others would approve a bond for high-speed rail and revisit the ongoing controversy over same-sex marriage by constitutionally eliminating domestic partnership rights.
Yet another would prohibit illegal immigrants from obtaining drivers' licenses, college aid, or any other public benefits not required by federal law.
Though immigration polled as voters' top issue in the gubernatorial race, "Schwarzenegger was adroit at avoiding issues that I think could have put him in an awkward position," DiCamillo said.
"He avoided immigration as a real campaign issue," said DiCamillo.
An issue that's national, such as immigration, boiling up in state voters' minds shows that Washington is not focused and underscores the trend toward Californians taking more into their own hands, the pollsters said.
"There's not consensus about what should be done but a sense there's a lot of unfinished business," Baldassare said. "That's why an issue like immigration bubbles up."
Nominated by who? Or dare I ask.
If California's hybrid democracy is being touted as a model for the nation, perhaps they should move that State's primary into February...
> Want to overhaul the Legislature into a single nonpartisan house?
Sounds like what Nebraska has had for nearly 80 years. Actually, now that BOTH houses have to be elected on a one-man/one-vote basis, a two-house stae system makes no sense at all. If it was done the same way as the Federal House/Senate is done, I could see the sense in a two-house system. However, it is no longer legal to do it that way.
As one who had California civics instruction in HS in the 60s I don't see anything new here except the instigator and maybe the frequency of use of certain of the provisions of the California Constitution. Remember gang that the 1978 Prop 13 limit on property taxes was an initiative (legislation that begins through a petition drive and is decided based on a statewide ballot).
California also has the referendum (legislature passing the buck through a plebiscite), but that seems to have gotten less play recently. The petition recall of Gray Davis that elected Governor Ahnold is a third leg of the populist California constitution. I believe these provisions were adopted in the early 20th century. Most states do not make it as easy to employ democratic populism. This will not spread wide without significant changes in many state constitutions.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.