Deep Roots Can Save Populism
The U.S. Supreme Court has an annoying way of saving us from shortsighted impulses. It happened again last week when the justices invalidated a Colorado law restricting outsiders’ ability to put initiatives on the state ballot.
Colorado, like Washington and numerous other western states, has a strong populist respect for citizen access to the ballot. But as sophisticated interest groups have learned how to exploit that access, state policy makers have struggled for ways to curb abuse without damaging grass-roots values.
That’s why Colorado tried to insist that signature gatherers be registered voters, wear badges and report their activities, including their pay, to the state.
That approach failed every court test it faced. At the end of the appeal trail, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the Colorado law unconstitutionally eroded “core political speech.”
Like it or not, the court has spoken, and emphatically. Only Chief Justice William Rehnquist dissented.
But while the court ruling stands assertively for public participation in civic life, it ignores a legitimate worry on many Americans’ minds:
Isn’t genuine grassroots involvement actually damaged when well-financed and often distant interests highjack its methods, using paid signature-gatherers who don’t even have to be registered voters, let alone engaged citizens?
The answer, as we see it, is yes. But the solution to that problem won’t lie in legislating tighter restrictions on the political process.
The solution, if one is to be found, will lie as usual with the people.
The health of democracy rests not on selectively keeping some out, but on aggressively inviting all in.
If paid, out-of-state signature-gatherers are having an inordinate impact on the political climate in Colorado, Washington or elsewhere, it’s up to all of us to correct the imbalance.
Of course, conventional wisdom holds that citizens are no match for big-bankrolled political chieftains. But citizens, when energized, often defy conventional wisdom.
In the case of ballot measures that are dreamed up and promoted on behalf of special-interest groups, the first line of defense is information. Regardless of whether the signature-gatherer is paid or is registered to vote or even lives in the state, if you don’t know for sure what the petition says, don’t sign it.
Informed, engaged, responsible voters don’t need legislative restrictions on political participation. They need merely to stay in touch, to study candidates and issues, and to sign only what they’ve taken the time to understand.
That’s a power no Supreme Court is going to take away.