[inquest]

I agree that there should be limits. If there are regularly more than 10 initiatives per cycle, then the rules are too loose. But ballot initiatives at the state level are still a good thing, when kept within reasonable limits. They almost always get debated more openly and fairly than something cobbled together in the back halls of a legislature.

Constitutional amendments, on the other hand, should be more sharply limited. Their ratification should require the approval of 2/3 of the voters - not only 2/3 of those who vote yes or no, but 2/3 of all those who show up to vote that day at all, for anything. Hence, no vote would count the same as a "no" vote.

[NautiNurse]

I agree with the 2/3 ratification for constitutional amendments, although there should be an additional measure to discourage the ridiculous number of amendments on a ballot.

I spent an extraordinary amount of time educating several elderly Florida voters about each of them in 2002. For goodness sakes, one of the amendments was 2/3 page long in small print. It was fraught with legalese babble, including about 6 sets of double negatives.