Proposition Proposition

[D. Mokarii]

Ballots designed without an option of NONE for each and every candidate race invites cheating and saves very little tax money. Given the cost of war and corruption, I'm quite sure that adding NONE to ballots would actually pay for itself. I'd be very surprised if ballot designers haven't realized this all along. It's so obvious that it undermines their credibility.
 
Less obvious is that a similar issue exists with propositions. Ballot Propositions (or Initiatives or Measures) are significantly different in that so many of them have tricky language or "poison pills" slipped into them. This is what turns so many (most?) propositions into a lesser-of-two-evils choice.  It's quite rational for people to then decline to vote either way, but this leaves their ballots still modifiable.  Unlike a slate of candidates, a proposition can be rewritten. Therefore, I'd like to see a proposition to add "REWRITE" to the usual APPROVE/DISAPPROVE answers for all future propositions.
 
Whenever I see an attempt to trick the public, I would like the new ballot answer to be something much stronger like "INVESTIGATE", but if a majority selects the less controversial REWRITE, I expect an investigation will follow anyway (at least by the press) and any bribery or other unethical behavior should then be discovered. The possibility of an investigation will certainly act as a deterrent to those who trick the public. Should attempted public trickery become a crime? Perhaps that should be a ballot proposition, but only after REWRITE passes.
 
Learning to use this great web site to show who-backs-what can help you take a suitably critical look at the wording knowing that the big money can usually expect a nice return on their "investment".
 
www.followthemoney.org/our-data/ballot-measures/


Possible text for a Ballot Prop (please feel free to suggest improved wording):

All future ballot initiatives shall offer voters an option (in addition to Approval or Disapproval) to call for a REWRITE of the proposition text by selecting REWRITE.

[Brian]

Thank you for these great posts, our valued and anonymous guest!

You're probably aware that Nevada is alone in the United States for offering a None of These Candidates option on its ballots since 1975 for U.S. President, Senator and Representative as well as its top state offices.  But it's not binding -- although None has finished first several times, the human with the most votes wins.  If the option were binding, how should the office get filled?  And would that process be constitutional, as the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Nevada's empty ballot slot is -- in a ruling just last year?

The Rewrite proposal for propositions is something I've never heard before.  Is this a Montrose Peace Vigil message board exclusive?  Courts have rewritten them when two similar proposals pass, and unwritten them when they contain unconstitutional provisions, like the anti-immigrant Proposition 187 in 1994 and the equally notorious Prop 8 in 2008 banning same sex marriage.  So it fascinates me to consider a third ink spot for propositions on my ballot.  If Rewrite won, who would conduct the rewrite?

At the very least, we need a stronger state law identifying the backers of initiative campaigns in all advertising.  Only wonks like me can read or figure out who the contributors are from the small print required now.

[D. Mokarii]

Dec 4, 2014 0:00:26 GMT -8 Brian said:

>  Thank you for these great posts, our valued and anonymous guest!

You're very welcome.
Thank you for the thank you.

You're probably aware that Nevada is alone in the United States for offering a None of These Candidates option on its ballots since 1975 for U.S. President, Senator and Representative as well as its top state offices.  But it's not binding -- although None has finished first several times, the human with the most votes wins.  If the option were binding, how should the office get filled?  And would that process be constitutional, as the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Nevada's empty ballot slot is -- in a ruling just last year?

I was not aware that Nevada had advanced democracy more with "none".  Thanks for enlightening me.  Perhaps, "Re-Nominate" would have been better for the usual case where the voter does not want any of the candidates to be entrusted with the office, but that might not cover some of those who currently select "none.  They might want yet another distinct option called something like "abstain", meaning that they'll just go along with the non-abstaining majority.  Propostions might need this too.   


The Rewrite proposal for propositions is something I've never heard before.  Is this a Montrose Peace Vigil message board exclusive? 

Yes, as far as I know.

Courts have rewritten them when two similar proposals pass, and unwritten them when they contain unconstitutional provisions, like the anti-immigrant Proposition 187 in 1994 and the equally notorious Prop 8 in 2008 banning same sex marriage.  So it fascinates me to consider a third ink spot for propositions on my ballot.  If Rewrite won, who would conduct the rewrite?

I would hope that if the press does its job, the original writers would be too embarrassed or unemployed to do the re-writing.  If the general issue is truly important, some other group(s) should step up and give it a try.  Eventually, someone would come up with language that's simple, clear, and free of the underlying tricks that plague so many of the props. 

At the very least, we need a stronger state law identifying the backers of initiative campaigns in all advertising.  Only wonks like me can read or figure out who the contributors are from the small print required now.

followthemoney.org or some other site may someday give the user a natural language interface to the data using already existing artificial intelligence techniques.  Unfortunately, the implementers would be correct to expect to be attacked rather than rewarded for such efforts.