Most Anti-Government Ballot Measures Headed to Defeat?

by Jennie Bowser

Frustration with government is evident in the collection of measures on statewide ballots tomorrow:  at least 14 measures in 11 states aim at curbing government power through limiting terms, reining in the judiciary, limiting taxes and spending, or restricting government’s right to regulate land use. 

Here’s a run-down on what recent polls are showing on the anti-government ballot measures:

With a vote that could be the nail in the coffin of the term limits movement, Oregon’s legislative term limits proposal is headed toward failure – 57 percent of those polled last week said they would vote no.  And since Oregon votes entirely by mail, it’s likely that many ballots had already been completed and mailed at the time the survey was conducted.

Measures aimed at limiting the judicial branch of state government are leaning toward passing, but not with particularly strong margins. South Dakota’s “JAIL for Judges” initiative, which would abolish judicial immunity and allow a committee of volunteers to set the rules for behavior by judges, juries, prosecutors and others, looks likely to pass, with 51 percent supporting it and 40 percent opposing. Support has declined from 67 percent in September, however.  Colorado’s judicial term limits measure looks likely to pass as well, with 51 percent of those polled supporting it and 36 percent opposed.  Oregon’s proposal to elect judges by district looks to be headed toward failure.

The declining popularity of TABOR-style spending limits that first surfaced with Colorado voters decision in 2005 to temporarily roll back their state’s TABOR continues into this year’s elections.  Oregon’s TABOR-style tax and spending limit appears to be headed for failure, with just 24 percent of those polled last week supporting it.  A poll in Nebraska shows 45 percent support their proposed tax and spending limitation, but a large percentage of voters—19 percent—remained undecided.  Just 33 percent of those polled in Maine last week support the TABOR proposal.

The most notable trend in the polling data on eminent domain and regulatory takings measure is the large number of undecided voters – in most polls NCSL identified on this issue, 20 percent or more of the voters remained undecided.  That makes the results of these questions hard to predict.  Nevertheless, voters appear to be leaning toward voting “yes” on property rights measures in Arizona, Florida, and Nevada.  Idaho’s measure is in a statistical tie in the most recent poll, with 39 percent supporting, 37 percent opposing and 24 percent undecided.  California voters are leaning toward “no,” although once again, the number of undecided voters is quite high at 23 percent.  Washington voters appear to be more certain about their “no” vote, with only 39 percent in favor and 10 percent still undecided.

The majority of the initiatives aiming to rein in government power appear to be headed toward failure tomorrow.  Possible exceptions include the judicial accountability initiative in South Dakota, judicial term limits in Colorado, and property rights measures in Arizona, Florida and Nevada.  Arizona’s is the only property rights measure leaning toward passage that includes the broader regulatory takings provisions, removing most of government’s ability to regulate land use.  The other three regulatory takings measures are either too close to call (Idaho), or appear to be headed toward failing.

If voters are in a “throw the bums out” mood, as recent polls on the congressional elections suggest, why are they not supporting initiatives reining in government?  It’s possible that the unusually high number of initiatives on the ballot this year is causing voter frustration.  History has shown us that when voters aren’t sure about just what a measure proposes (something that can easily happen when voters are faced with a long ballot containing many complex questions), they are more likely to vote no.

Or it could be something else entirely.  Many of these measures were qualified for the ballot using paid signature gatherers hailing from other states, something that’s been written about extensively in many local papers.  The money to pay the petition circulators, as well as much of the money to fund the campaigns, comes from out of state as well.  Again, this has been covered in local papers.  Perhaps voters are using their vote to express their dislike of this ever-increasing trend.  Then again, maybe the presence of these measures on the ballot was never an indication of strong grassroots support, but rather an indication of the organizational abilities and financial resources of their promoters.

Tune in tomorrow to see if the pollsters were right.  NCSL will provide complete coverage of ballot measure election results beginning at 7:00pm MST on our StateVote 2006 page.

Comments

[Michael Bindner]

So, what were the results of these measures?

Also, for a while there has been a call for a constitutional convention circulating among state legislators. The last I read, it was within one state of passage. Do I recall correctly?

I say this because there is an effort underway to call for a constitutional convention to propose formal regional government, that is the establishment of between seven and ten regions with their own legislatures and presidents (or regional vice presidents) who would control most issues in their regions, as well as collecting all taxes. Some within this movement believe in abolishing the central core, while some are in favor of retaining a core government with a small elected council and an indirectly elected President to govern the military on overseas deployments and to safegard civil rights vis-a-vis regional governments.

This campaign is directed at state legislators, who would be the ones to call for the convention (which would leave the bill of rights sacrosanct).