Prop 49 - Oh, yeah!

[Iwillnevergiveup]

Here's a simply question. If 75% of Americans want our Congress to take a certain action, will the Congress do it?

If we live in any form of self-government, the answer must be yes.

But lately, many of us aren't so sure. Far too often it seems as though our elected representatives are busy representing the donors to their campaigns rather than their constituents.

Well, now we have a chance to find out whether or not we still live in a democratic republic. And if not, we have a way to regain it.

As you may remember, when I ran for Secretary of State, I said I'd push for a statewide measure calling upon Congress to reverse the Citizens United ruling that allows unlimited corporate spending on political campaigns. I thought that if elected, I'd have enough political strength to persuade the legislature to place it on the 2016 ballot.

Well, representative democracy worked better than I'd expected. An all volunteer group called Money Out Voters In asked the Legislature to place such a question on the 2014 ballot. After 55,000 emails, 176,000 faxes, and hundreds of citizens personally visiting the Capitol, the Legislature did it.

Proposition 49 will instruct California's congressional delegation to support amendments to the United States Constitution to establish that only real people have constitutional rights and to limit political campaign money to create a level playing field where billionaires don't drown out the voices or ordinary Americans.

If Californians overwhelmingly vote for Prop 49 -- as we've seen in other states -- we'll find out whether our elected representatives will actually represent us. But, before that, we need to make sure that voters know about Prop 49.

I'm hoping you'll help.

I've signed on to become the campaign director for the official Yes on 49 campaign. While I don't think we need to raise millions to win this campaign, we do need thousands of people to make small contributions so that we can inform voters about Prop 49.

I'm personally working to raise $25,000 to help pass Prop 49. Will you donate whatever amount you can afford today?

Thanks,
Derek


http://www.derekcressman.com/

[NYC_SKP]

1. K/R. (nt)

[Iwillnevergiveup]

2. Wish Derek had won the SOS race, but

he's not letting any grass grow under his feet. Hope we haven't seen the last of him in public life.

[BrotherIvan]

3. Donating

This one is going to be very interesting. It's worth the fight.

[JayhawkSD]

4. Not a reasonable question.

"Here's a simply question. If 75% of Americans want our Congress to take a certain action, will the Congress do it?"

It presupposes the replacement of representative governance with direct democracy, which is not the form of government specified by our constitution. If you want Congress to pass legislation based on the fact that "75% of Americans want it" why bother with election of a representative Congress at all? Just hold referendums on issues and let people decide based on the general public's superior knowledge of every subject.

When I lived in Tucson we had a water shortage, so Arizona built a canal to bring water from the Colorado River to our fair city. Having traveled across 400 miles of desert and concentrating minerals by evaporation, not to mention the addition of God knows how many drowned animals, it was pretty bad quality water. Not that it started out all that great, since a whole bunch of cities dump their sewage into the Colorado.

We weren’t sure we wanted that stuff, and the original idea was to give it to the cotton farmers and for us to take what farmers had been using. That didn’t work out because the canal water was too salty and the farmers could not use it, so we were stuck with it. Evidently it never occurred to anyone that if it killed plants maybe we should not be drinking it.

So the question arose as to whether we should add it directly to our water system or if we should “recharge” it. The latter would mean that we would dump it into the ground and let it make its way down into the existing ground water pool, where we could pump it out as needed. Experts said that making its way down through the ground would purify it enormously, so treating it would be less expensive when we pumped it out and used it.

Then some nutcase suggested that we could not be sure that our water would stay where we put it, and that once it was in the ground it might drift away. Experts said that, no, that would not happen; that groundwater is not some sort of river and that it would stay until we needed it, but fewer and fewer people believed these experts, especially once the specter was raised that it might go south to where Mexico could get it. Of course, if it had stayed in the Colorado River, Mexico would have gotten it, but…

The city government decided to recharge to water and the result was much the same as the Senate refusing to pass gun background checks yesterday; outrage and calls for a popular vote, which in this case was forthcoming. So many people were freaked out by the prospect of Mexico getting our water that recharge lost by a landslide.

So the canal water was added to our water system and the result was very similar to throwing a handful of fresh horse poop into a high speed fan. It was awesome. No one would drink the water and some would not even bathe in it. Bottled water sales skyrocketed and shortages developed. I never actually documented anyone bathing in bottled water, but I will all but guarantee that some people were doing so. Between the water itself and people not bathing, Tucson smelled like a gymnasium full of dead fish.

Further, the water rapidly degraded our water distribution system. It eroded pipes very quickly, causing them to leak badly and eventually burst, and it chewed up pumps as if they were pumping abrasive sand. After six months the city government said, vote or no vote, this water is going into the ground because we cannot afford the destruction it is wreaking on our water system.

The direct democracy that you are calling for cost millions of dollars and huge inconvenience because 75% of the people thought they were smarter than their elected representatives.

[pinto]

5. I think you're comparing apples to oranges. Policy to procedure.

Citizens Untied is largely a policy issue. Arizona's water supply issue that you note is largely a technical procedural issue.

I see your point, yet don't think the two are really comparable.

[JayhawkSD]

6. But you can't have it both ways.

I'm not comparing one thing to another, I'm discussing representative government versus direct democracy, and illustrating what happens when direct democracy takes over.

You can't have issues decided one way for "policy issues" and a different way for "technical issues." Even if you tried to do that, who would decide which issues would be decided by Congress and which would be submitted to referendum? We have one form of government. and it is the representative form for a reason. The founders did not want important matters, wether "procedural" or "technical," being decided by the emotions of the population at large, and one popular referendum after another has proven the wisdom of that decision.

[pinto]

7. See your point.

Truth be told, I'm not a big fan of government by proposition. See our Prop. 13 and Prop. 8. Yet we do have it both ways and have to do the best with what we've got.

CA's proposition system, iirc, was initially a grass roots effort to stem the western "barons" influence.

My point is that I'd like to see highly technical matters in the hands of the legislatures with professional input and open deliberation. How to draw the line is an issue in and of itself, as you mention.