[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers


View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics

Wire Services
Advertise Liberally Blue CA Ad Network

John Garamendi Becomes First Prominent Dem To Endorse Lakoff Initiative Concept

by: David Dayen

Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:25:09 AM PDT


John Garamendi appeared on Angie Coiro's Live From The Left Coast with Professor George Lakoff and our own David Atkins to talk about the California Democracy Act, Lakoff's one-line initiative which would change all legislative actions on budget and revenue to a majority vote.  Listen at around 13:00 for Garamendi's remarks endorsing Lakoff's approach.

Garamendi: Well, if you put a proposition or a Constitutional amendment on the ballot, and it says, gives the legislature a majority vote to raise taxes and a budget, or one or the other, it's likely to be turned down. You know, that's, the polling indicates that, there are issues that have come up before, there was one I think two years ago that was on the ballot, it was turned down (it was 2004 -ed.).  That was 55% for budgeting.  The fundamental problem is, we're not framing the issue, we're not putting the proper issue to the people, and I think that was the common error from just a moment ago.  If you make it about the budget, if you make it about taxes, I think you're sure to lose.  If you make it about the very nature of democracy, all the way back to the Greek, the Greek civilization and the start of democracy, it was a majority.  It was a majority situation, and here we are in this day and age in America where we really have thrown majority out, and we, in California at least, we are faced with minority rule, and some would say the tyranny of the minority.  Which is exactly what's happened in the last two or three decades now, when it's come time for tight budgets and tight situations, urgency bills, as well as budget or tax bills.  So I think we need to have a new discussion about what is the nature of our democracy.

While not an explicit endorsement, this mirrors Lakoff's theory on how to properly put together this kind of initiative.  The majority rule theory is fairly rooted in the American imagination, and that's really the only way to explain this to people.  There isn't enough of a sense that we have minority rule right now, and that this tyranny of the minority is largely the cause of the state's dysfunction over the last several decades.  This is more than anything an education project, and Garamendi appears to understand it.

We're a democracy, we elected these people, let them do their jobs, and if we don't like what they do, we'll throw them out the next election.

Majority rule is an accountability measure.  People currently have everyone and no one to blame for the problems of the state.  Democrats can blame the rules, Republicans can blame the Democrats.  Majority rule would make things much clearer for the public.

This is an important turning point, to have someone like Garamendi openly siding with the concept of the Lakoff initiative in what is fast becoming a grassroots/establishment split.  The folks at CA Majority Rule are still raising money for a poll to prove their concept as one that can work with voters.  I suggest you give it strong consideration.

David Dayen :: John Garamendi Becomes First Prominent Dem To Endorse Lakoff Initiative Concept
Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Good for Garamendi! (0.00 / 0)
This is the way a leader behaves. Mr. Garamendi has looked at the polls. He remembers the last vote. But, instead of tucking his tail between his legs and running away from an issue that is strangling the state, he looks at what we can learn from this. At what we need to say, and to whom. That is what polls are for. And what history is for. To learn from.

Leaders do not learn to not touch the issues that need solving. They learn how to approach them better. How to frame them correctly. And how to lead public opinion. Not how to be whipsawed by it.

My thanks to the Lt. Governor for a shining example to other California elected officials.


Agreed (0.00 / 0)
Leading public opinion is exactly how this is going to have to work.

The last one lost because it was 55%.  Fifty-five percent means politicians aren't trustworthy enough to handle the budget but you should make it easier for them anyway.  Fifty percent means what's fair is fair.  Clearly a stronger argument.

Yes We Kang


[ Parent ]
Correction (0.00 / 0)
As it turns out it's more like nine sentences.  

I listened to the show (0.00 / 0)
Now it's clear where the one sentence business comes from -- Lakoff himself.  Yes, "one sentence" may be a powerful frame -- but it's also not true.  Why not just be accurate and say that the initiative can be summed up in a sentence?  

Note also that the single caller (a low number for a one hour segment) raised the issue of minority protection, which I argued in a prior thread should be addressed by the text.  IMHO she didn't get a very good answer.


[ Parent ]
Huh? (0.00 / 0)
The minority currently governs the state. All this initiative does is return that power to the majority, as should happen in a democracy. The minority would continue to enjoy the right to propose and vote on legislation, to use the legal system, and of course, to run their own candidates against the majority in regularly scheduled elections.

No more is needed or required, not if you want to have a functioning democracy.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
My suggestion (0.00 / 0)
is to acknowledge the issue by requiring, following a vote that gets a majority but not two-thirds, a delay of 60 or 90 days, after which a majority vote would prevail.  This would guarantee that the minority gets a full debate and not detract meaningfully from majority rights.

Bear in mind that the initiative as written effectively eliminates any application of the governor's veto and blue pencil authority.  I support doing that, but there will be a perception that the legislative majority will be completely unrestrained.

   


[ Parent ]
What are you talking about? (4.00 / 1)
The minority already has rights. They get to participate in debate and cast their votes. If those legislators are outvoted, they're outvoted. Then they turn to the ballot box.

You make it sound like American democracy somehow was non-functional before we gave the minority control over policy (thereby making elections meaningless) and before we blew up the checks-and-balances by giving a governor line-item veto power that executives were never meant to have in a Madisonian system.

Your whole approach is symptomatic of the reason why California government is broken - you're so focused on appeasing the legislative minority (who by definition have lost elections as a party and therefore do not have a popular mandate) that you're willing to throw out both democracy and effective government.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
My whole approach? (0.00 / 0)
Just for the record, I would prefer far more radical change (i.e. a unicameral parliamentary system elected by a mix of single-district STV and statewide party lists).  Yet, I'm so cynical as to not want such a thing put on the ballot right now simply because it would lose badly.  

Similarly, I like the Lakoff proposal but am concerned, based on polling data, that it will lose as presently worded.  Lakoff is a certified smart guy, but he has no experience with initiatives and based his draft on no opinion research whatsoever.  Conversely, many of the results from the recent PPIC poll give reason to think that an opposition campaign would be successful using a tax-and-spend argument.  People seem willing to consider major reforms like this, but they seem even more concerned about spending (noting the support for a spending cap).  But what they really, really like are goo-goo reforms (noting the results on the initiative reform ideas), which is what got me thinking about adding a period to allow for a full debate.  

A powerful argument in favor of the initiative would be that we simply want the state to handle tax and spending decisions the way most states (and the federal government) do, but getting rid of the veto takes that away.  I see no evidence that this key point got any consideration from Lakoff.


[ Parent ]
Just to clarify (0.00 / 0)
On the veto issue, for this measure I would keep it but get rid of the blue pencil (based on what other states do).

I should mention that I don't understand why this measure was limited to revenue and budget votes.  I think it would be better to cover super-majority requirements generally.


[ Parent ]
Literalism at its silliest. (3.00 / 1)
A legislative minority should not get legal "protection" to allow it to prevent the legislative majority from doing business.  That's what the electoral system is FOR.

"Minority" protections are protections that (should) prevent the majority of the electorate from exercising its historical prejudices against specific types of groups or individuals (typically the historically disfavored).


[ Parent ]
The other sentences (0.00 / 0)
Are legal boilerplate. The one sentence Lakoff refers to is the main part of the initiative, the actual change that will be made.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

[ Parent ]
Nope (0.00 / 0)
Boilerplate is still part of the initiative.

The one-sentence findings section you refer to is not operative language and won't be added to the Constitution if the initiative passes.    


[ Parent ]
Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads


Support Calitics:

Get discounted bestsellers at Barnes & Noble.com!

Advertisers


-->
California Friends
Shared Communities
Resources
California News
Progressive Organizations
The Big BlogRoll

Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch

Daily Email Summary


Powered by: SoapBlox