Librarian
02-23-2009, 01:09 PM
California once had this neat political tool, generally called 'initiative and referendum'. In theory, it allowed The People to go around a recalcitrant government and enact some kind of reform.
1978's Jarvis/Gann "People's Initiative to Limit Property Taxation" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978)) campaign, AKA "Prop 13" is an example where, at least technically, that theory worked as expected (the actual results of that are arguable as to benefit).
The structure of the tool still remains; the California Secretary of State's web site, http://www.sos.ca.gov/ , has an information page on initiatives at
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_h.htm.
Anyone can see the current list, for the upcoming election, at
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_j.htm, and there is a lot of historical information linked through the bottom of that page.
Initiatives seem to appear all the time. Some win, some lose. The Legislature puts several of them on the ballot; other than that, it is usually union or corporate interests that do it.
As painful as it is to say, in this environment, gun owners are definitely the little guys.
A really thorough treatment of why that's important is a book-length document at the Center for Governmental Studies (http://www.cgs.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=5&Itemid=72).
The bottom line?
The era of the volunteer-run initiative is over in California...
and has been since 1982, the last time a volunteer initiative made it to the ballot.
Here's the Secretary of State's Campaign Financing page for ballot measures:
http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Measures/
Look at the sponsors. Look at the money spent to propose and oppose.
Try to look dispassionately at the current public climate in California: most people do not care about guns.
Guns are not a 'pocket book' issue.
Guns have a negative image in our media. That provides free anti-gun advertising.
A good portion of California gun owners - present Calguns company excepted! - just want to be left alone*. There's a strong aversion to 'getting on lists' and 'attracting attention'. Signing up to support a ballot measure, even registering to vote, is often rejected. So, whatever the real numbers of gun owners in California, their interests are diverse; 'gun owners' are not a political force - gun ownership does not unite us.
Barring our own unpredictable pro-gun event on the scale of Patrick Purdy or Virginia Tech, some huge emotion-changing, if-only-they'd-had-guns-they'd-have-been-OK thing, public support for the kinds of changes in gun laws most Calgunners would like to see just is not there.
So, because
the public is not on our side
the media is against us
gun owners are not a powerful bloc
ballot measures are extremely expensive
the initiative process really doesn't work for 'the people' any more
- that is, because the current conditions are just wrong, trying to get some pro-gun measure on a ballot isn't helpful.
That sucks, but that's real.
It might be possible to change 3. It's possible, I think, to reduce the impact of 2 (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=141665) and move to change 1. But until we change 1 and 3, no ballot measure we would like has a chance to pass.
(* I'm sure quite a number of Calgunners would also like to be 'left alone', but being here shows at least some realization that gub'mint isn't going along with that.)
1978's Jarvis/Gann "People's Initiative to Limit Property Taxation" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978)) campaign, AKA "Prop 13" is an example where, at least technically, that theory worked as expected (the actual results of that are arguable as to benefit).
The structure of the tool still remains; the California Secretary of State's web site, http://www.sos.ca.gov/ , has an information page on initiatives at
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_h.htm.
Anyone can see the current list, for the upcoming election, at
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_j.htm, and there is a lot of historical information linked through the bottom of that page.
Initiatives seem to appear all the time. Some win, some lose. The Legislature puts several of them on the ballot; other than that, it is usually union or corporate interests that do it.
As painful as it is to say, in this environment, gun owners are definitely the little guys.
A really thorough treatment of why that's important is a book-length document at the Center for Governmental Studies (http://www.cgs.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=5&Itemid=72).
The bottom line?
The era of the volunteer-run initiative is over in California...
and has been since 1982, the last time a volunteer initiative made it to the ballot.
Here's the Secretary of State's Campaign Financing page for ballot measures:
http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Measures/
Look at the sponsors. Look at the money spent to propose and oppose.
Try to look dispassionately at the current public climate in California: most people do not care about guns.
Guns are not a 'pocket book' issue.
Guns have a negative image in our media. That provides free anti-gun advertising.
A good portion of California gun owners - present Calguns company excepted! - just want to be left alone*. There's a strong aversion to 'getting on lists' and 'attracting attention'. Signing up to support a ballot measure, even registering to vote, is often rejected. So, whatever the real numbers of gun owners in California, their interests are diverse; 'gun owners' are not a political force - gun ownership does not unite us.
Barring our own unpredictable pro-gun event on the scale of Patrick Purdy or Virginia Tech, some huge emotion-changing, if-only-they'd-had-guns-they'd-have-been-OK thing, public support for the kinds of changes in gun laws most Calgunners would like to see just is not there.
So, because
the public is not on our side
the media is against us
gun owners are not a powerful bloc
ballot measures are extremely expensive
the initiative process really doesn't work for 'the people' any more
- that is, because the current conditions are just wrong, trying to get some pro-gun measure on a ballot isn't helpful.
That sucks, but that's real.
It might be possible to change 3. It's possible, I think, to reduce the impact of 2 (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=141665) and move to change 1. But until we change 1 and 3, no ballot measure we would like has a chance to pass.
(* I'm sure quite a number of Calgunners would also like to be 'left alone', but being here shows at least some realization that gub'mint isn't going along with that.)