|
|
"Men by their makeup are naturally divided into two camps:
those who fear and distrust the people and
wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of higher classes;and those who identify themselves with the people,
have confidence in them, cherish and consider them the safest and most honest,
if not always the wisest repository of the public interest.These two camps exist in every country,
and wherever men are free to think, speak, and write,
they will identify themselves."Thomas Jefferson
Many arguments are made against citizens having the initiative. Most of them are false and/or irrelevant. These false or irrelevant arguments mask the three main reasons for opposition to the initiative.
1. The people can't be trusted because they are ignorant and apathetic. This reason is popular with many academics and media luminaries.
2. We don't want to share the people's power with the people (power that was delegated to the legislature by the people). This is the reason most lobbyists and political operatives (and some legislators) oppose I & R.
3. We are afraid the people might use the initiative to make it more expensive (or more difficult) for us to do business. This is the reason most large corporations oppose I & R.
Most opponents of the Initiative & Referendum prefer not to disclose their real reasons for opposition. Instead, they use the numerous specious (but to the uninformed) plausible-sounding arguments that they have invented. All the arguments we have heard have been compiled. They are discussed in more detail at the following links:
Dennis Polhill (Independence Institute) compiles the arguments.
Mike Ford (Initiative For Texas) compiles the arguments.
David Broder (Washington Post) attacks the Initiative process.Peter Schrag (Sacramento Bee) attacks the Initiative process.
In 1980 James K. Nance (Baker & Botts) wrote a 204 page document, The Case against I & R. Contact Baker & Botts.