Three years ago, when Joni Bosh was five months
pregnant, she spent July 4th on a street corner in Phoenix.
Air-conditioned cars whizzed past her, but she kept waving her
petitions through the 110-degree air, shouting for signatures.
Arizona's conservative legislature had just passed a "takings' bill
and she and her allies had only 60 days to collect the 52,000 names
needed to put it to a public vote, or it would go into
effect.
Sweating in the heat was just the
beginning of the fight to defeat the referendum and its developer
backers. Bosh and other environmentalists had to enter the world of
power politics. They hired a consultant to orchestrate the campaign
and paid people to drum up signatures. Once the bill made it onto
the ballot, they paid to blast the message on radio and TV that
takings - compensating property owners for government regulation -
was just too expensive.
"We
handled it like a Senate race," says Bosh. "It boiled down to an
immense headache about raising money."
The golden age of "direct
democracy'
This is what "direct democracy"
involves today - ironic, for something that was developed to boot
money out of politics. Populists in the late 19th century thought
that initiatives and referenda could loosen the tight grip that the
rich exercised on legislators, so they set out to embed these
processes in state constitutions.
In the East
and South, politics were mired in ethnic and political machines,
and most state legislatures fiercely resisted giving citizens the
power to make laws. But to its newest citizens, the Western
frontier felt clean, pure and egalitarian. In the early 1900s, all
but New Mexico voted to allow both initiatives and referenda.
Statewide initiatives and referenda remain
primarily a Western phenomenon. Elsewhere, state legislatures and
governors still fend off this form of direct democracy: A bill to
allow initiatives was introduced in committee in the Pennsylvania
state legislature in 1991. It died two years later.
Ballot measures were used to protect the
Western environment as early as 1924, when Californians voted to
ban all dams on the Klamath River, which still runs free. But
during the post-war patriotism of the 1940s, and on into the early
1960s, very few people challenged state legislatures with
initiatives or referenda.
Political unrest in
the early 1970s fired up the grassroots anew. In 1970, Americans
celebrated Earth Day and Oregonians voted on an initiative to ban
dams from their wild and scenic rivers. The next two decades were
direct democracy's heyday. When people found state legislatures
dominated by any special interest, they turned to the grass roots,
especially in California, Oregon, Washington and Colorado, says
Earl Bender, a Washington, D.C.-based initiative consultant. While
the right wing reined in government with tax reform and term limits
initiatives, environmentalists used the process to stall the
mushrooming nuclear industry and to preserve open space around the
West.
Campaigns were run on shoestring budgets
- as low as $1,000 - with the help of some dedicated door-knockers,
says Jerry Meral of the California-based Planning and Conservation
League. On the day before the 1974 elections, Meral and his friends
wanted to alert voters to an initiative he organized to stop a dam
on the Stanislaus River: They hung a sheet painted with "Yes On 17"
over a freeway and stood on the overpass, encouraging zooming cars
to honk if they liked rivers. Like many initiatives, it lost, but
at the time the activists didn't blame it on their lack of TV ads
or direct mail.
"We were so
innocent," he says.
hard
times
in a conservative age
This kind of innocence ended abruptly with the 1988 and 1990
elections. Although environmentalists won 61 percent of their
ballot propositions in 1990 (the across-the-board average for all
ballot propositions was 38 percent), they lost some of their
largest and most publicized campaigns. Among these was an
initiative known as "Big Green," which attempted to address a wide
range - perhaps too wide a range - of environmental problems in
California, including ozone protection, oil spills, pesticides,
recycling and logging.
While the fate of any
initiative campaign depends on the political landscape of that
state at that moment, Bender says that several forces aligned to
crush environmental initiatives during the early 1990s. America was
slipping into a recession and into a war in the Persian Gulf.
Americans became increasingly leery about voting for anything that
could raise taxes or cost money. The press became similarly
conservative.
"When Iraq
invaded Kuwait, environmental coverage disappeared," says David
Schmidt, who had been leading a California initiative against
clearcutting called Forests Forever. "It was sudden, dramatic and
total."
waking a sleeping
giant
At the same time, the extractive
industries woke up to the damage that initiatives could do to both
their profits and their reputations. They decided that it would set
a bad precedent if they were painted as polluters in one state,
even if their business was in another, says Sally Cross of the
Oregon Natural Resources Council. Cross worked on a 1992 Oregon
initiative to make strip-mining companies clean up their waste.
Initiative promoters were outspent 20 to 1, and much of that money
came from Nevada mining companies. In California, the logging, oil,
pesticide and gas industries placed counter-initiatives on the 1990
ballot - dubbed "Big Brown" and "Stumps Forever" by opponents -
confusing voters about which initiatives would help the
environment.
Of course, both sides misrepresent
the issues, but in the age of TV, the power to misrepresent comes
in a sound bite and is bought with money. Some initiatives to
create open space still pass - such as Colorado's GOCO in 1992,
which allocated state lottery money to buy land. But most
initiatives challenging a resource-based industry since 1990 have
been smothered by the opposition's money. Their consultants drill
holes in environmental propositions by calling them too confusing,
costly or complex, says Bender, and they outspend environmentalists
by up to 46 to 1 to get their message on the airwaves and into
mailboxes.
In 1990, packaging companies
defeated a popular recycling initiative in Oregon by airing an ad
with a close-up of a dead fish on a styrofoam platter. "Salmonella,
botulism ...," said the voice-over, warning that public health was
at risk if certain packagings were banned. Industry had
out-sensationalized
environmentalists.
"The
opposition has purchased the public's fear," says Maureen Kirk of
the Oregon State Public Interest Research Group, who worked on the
campaign. "We need to be extremely calm in our response."
Environmentalists weren't only being outspent,
they were also being out-strategized. Conservatives had discovered
that by running initiative campaigns on any number of "hot button
issues," such as gay rights, private property "takings," abortion
or school vouchers, they could bolster their membership, increase
voter turnout for favored candidates and force the opposition to
take time and money away from their own candidates to counter the
attack. Winning the initiative was gravy.
Grover Norquist, a close ally of Newt Gingrich and president of the
initiative group Americans for Tax Reform, exposed this strategy in
a 1992 article, "Prelude to a Landslide," which linked the
Republican 1994 congressional takeover to conservative ballot
initiatives. Since then, Norquist has staged a monthly conference
call offering strategy tips to organizers of an array of
conservative initiatives.
"The
conference calls are extremely helpful. We can get initiative and
referenda activists and people who are experts on the phone
together," says Norquist's aide Kolt Jones, who adds that his tax
reform group coordinates anti-gay, takings, anti-abortion and
parental-rights initiatives because they "are all key to reforming
the ways the states give special treatments." The "star" initiative
of the network this year, says Jones, is a California initiative
that would eliminate all affirmative action from all public
institutions.
The upshot of this national
coordination from the right is that, instead of offering their own
measures, environmentalists have to struggle to defend the status
quo. A year after Joni Bosh and others held the property-rights
movement at bay in Arizona, organizers in Washington had to rally
against a takings initiative.
The lessons of defeat
But
the defensive posture has been educational: Environmentalists have
learned to win at least some campaigns. The techniques used in
Arizona and Washington are now considered essential. In fact, this
year Montana's clean water initiative campaign hired Dee
Frankforth, the campaign manager for Washington's anti-takings
battle, as a consultant. According to Frankforth, campaigns must
have a narrow subject, and a message developed by polling and focus
groups that doesn't seem costly or confusing. They need a broad
coalition of allies to continuously drill this message into the
public's head, and spokespeople who can't be painted as radicals by
well-funded opponents. Organizers are now prepared for lawsuits
challenging everything from the margin width on the petitions to
the drug histories of the petitioners. And they try to have the
same number of zeros in their budget as the opposition, so they can
compete in the airwave wars and pay consultants and signature
gatherers.
The Humane Society of the United
States has taken the next step by forming a national network
similar to Norquist's. Its initiatives against some kinds of
hunting and trapping are among the few ballot measures that have
passed since 1990. Relying on its massive membership in local
chapters (2.5 million) and the national organization's experience
in crafting sophisticated campaigns, the society has put the
National Rifle Association and the Safari Club International on the
defensive.
Should environmentalists take this
step? Many consultants think so. Since 1990, Roy Morgan, of the
D.C.-based Americans for the Environment, has worked to develop a
national strategy. He's urged national conservation groups to aid
local groups, held two national conferences for initiative
organizers and consultants to share expertise, and is forming a
clearinghouse on right-wing ballot initiatives to unite a broad
group of progressives, including environmentalists, unions,
teachers and civil-rights activists.
But some
environmentalists who have spent years in the trenches fighting for
initiatives are discouraged by what has happened to direct
democracy.
"I have a longtime
fear that initiatives will get so expensive people can't use them,"
says Bosh. "This is a warning for the future. We are getting
bombarded by the other side."
"It's a very time- - and
labor- - intensive way to have a public discussion," says Cross,
who recently lost a mining initiative. And Kirk, who lost a
recycling initiative in 1990, adds, "It is a very rare decision for
us to do proactive environmental initiatives anymore."
Instead, Kirk wants to work on getting big
money out of initiative campaigns, a subject which is just
beginning to be discussed. In Montana, where half of the
contributions to ballot campaigns between 1982 and 1994 came from
corporations, voters will face an initiative next month that would
prevent corporations from funding initiative campaigns.
Has the populist dream ended? David Schmidt of
the Environmental Protection Agency, who has written one of the few
books on initiatives, says no. At least people in the West have an
alternative to hostile legislatures, he says. Even if initiative
campaigns don't win, they often bolster citizen activism and raise
public interest which could lead to definitive results in the
future.
Despite the ferment over the process, it
is being widely used this year by environmentalists as a way around
increasingly conservative state legislatures. Oregon is tackling
grazing reform, which has come to a standstill nationally. Montana
is asking the booming mining industry to clean its water. Hunters
in Washington, Oregon, Colorado and Idaho are debating the ethical
way to kill an animal. In each campaign, things are being done in
old ways as well as new - signature gatherers still stand on Main
Street, but consultants write the spiels the gatherers tell passing
shoppers - as the West struggles to maintain a history of direct
democracy in the age of pricey politics.
Heather Abel is a staff reporter for High
Country News.
Has big money doomed direct democracy?
Document Actions
- Email this
- Write Editor
- Feeds
- Discuss
- Font Size: A A A
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon

