Since 1992 and at earlier points in the state’s history, Mississippi voters have been able to bypass the Legislature and engage in what has been called “direct democracy” in proposing constitutional amendments and getting them decided at the ballot box rather than at the state Capitol Building.
But it appears that Mississippi lawmakers have been unable to reach agreement on new rules to resurrect Mississippi’s voter initiative rights during the waning days of the 2022 regular session.
State Sen. John Polk, R-Hattiesburg, chairman of the Senate Accountability, Efficiency and Transparency Committee, and State Rep. Fred Shanks, R-Brandon, chairman of the House Constitution Committee, have been so far unable as lead conferees to get their respective committees and the legislative leadership together on key points necessary to revive the state's ballot initiative process.
What put the two legislative chambers at odds? Primarily it is the signature threshold necessary to place a matter on the ballot. The House wanted 12 percent of those who voted in the last statewide election or about 100,000 signatures. The Senate was 12 percent of registered voters on the day of the last presidential election in the state or about 240,000.
Obviously, the Senate signature threshold is significantly higher and more difficult for those seeking to change state laws to attain.
In the 2020 election, Mississippi voters approved a voter initiative authorizing a medical marijuana program outlined in Initiative 65 over expressed objections from majority legislative leaders. Mississippi voters approved Initiative 65 with 73.7 percent of the vote.
But the results of that referendum were annulled by the Mississippi Supreme Court. The state’s High Court ruled that the state’s 1992 ballot initiative process was flawed because the Legislature had spent several years without addressing the impact of Mississippi's loss of a congressional district in 2001 on the constitutional provision governing that process.
The court ruled that the state's initiative process was broken and that because Initiative 65 was put in motion through that flawed process and procedures, the medical marijuana initiative could not stand despite overwhelming voter support.
As noted in previous columns on this topic, there has existed a sort of iron triangle between the voters, the Mississippi Legislature, and the state Supreme Court for more than a century on the issue of ballot initiatives. The voters have struggled to hold on to their ability to bypass the Legislature in changing public policy in the state.
Why? Because the Legislature designed the former initiative process in Mississippi to be difficult for those who wish to circumvent lawmakers and get into the business of directly writing or changing laws for themselves.
Since 1993, there have been 66 instances where various Mississippi citizens or groups have attempted to utilize the state's initiative process. Some 52 of those attempts simply expired for lack of certified signatures or other procedural deficiencies.
In the fallout from the Supreme Court's decision to throw out the political result of Initiative 65, it became clear that many lawmakers were prepared to shift the ballot initiative process away from constitutional changes as allowed by the 1991 initiative process to a process that will enable statutory changes only.
But even if lawmakers do what's necessary to enable statutory ballot initiatives, state voters will have far less power than they had before. There is a fundamental difference between being able to change the state's constitution and changing a statute.
Some 26 states have the right to ballot initiative or referendum processes, excluding most Southern states. If Mississippi can reclaim the right of ballot initiative, even if for statutes only, it will represent a victory of sorts compared to most of our neighboring states.
Florida is the only remaining Southern state that has a very similar voter initiative process to that which Mississippi voters possessed until the Miss. Supreme Court struck it down
With the apparent failure of both legislative chambers to reach agreement on reviving Mississippi’s voter initiative process, our state would join Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, South Carolina, and Tennessee as states that do not have either the right of voter initiative or referendum. However, Alabama, Georgia voters must approve constitutional amendments proposed by the legislature.
Neighboring Arkansas voters have initiative and referendum processes that enable them to directly propose and vote on both statutes and constitutional amendments.
Sid Salter is a syndicated columnist. Contact him at sidsalter@sidsalter.com.
6 comments:
The legislature will probably never allow direct democracy to happen again. It is in direct opposition to their rule. Imagine if someone got the brilliant idea to use the referendum process to introduce term limits or to reduce compensation for legislators?
With that said, I am not a big fan of such direct democracy. However, we definitely need term limits and we need them very soon.
Like a Louisiana tick.....dug in deep. At no other time in history have our elected from top to bottom shown WE THE PEOPLE their true nature. The people mean nothing to them. It's all about personal enrichment for the majority and the honest ones if there are any left are spineless. I use to defend US.....served my country because I believed in US. No longer. WE let this happen and it is WE that pay the price. God isn't dead but is surely made the decision for this go round of mankind.
For the love of all things holy, Kingfish please stop paying for this worthless content.
Of course Salter leaves out some of the proposed 'improvements' to the initiative process that have been agreed upon between the two chambers, most notably the elimination of the 'legislative alternative' being put on the ballot alongside the initiative.
Most recently, the "medical" marijuana initiative was on the ballot alongside the legislative alternative provided by the 1991 system which many believe caused confusion in the process and the promoters of the recreational weed bill claimed it was done just for that purpose. Regardless, it was part of the initiative process and used appropriately.
In response, this attempt to revive the process in a better format omitted this provision -- but doesn't get the attention of those clamoring for 'direct democracy' like they have in the great state of California.
Maybe the Senate is on to something with tying the number of signatures to the number of REGISTERED voters; might put some emphasis on counties --- or forced upon counties by the state ---- to purge and clean up their bloated voter rolls.
To the best of my recollection the Supremes found that the only thing broke about the process was that it referenced 5 Congressional districts instead of 4. It should be difficult to change the Constitution but not impossible. While I find it difficult to trust a lot of the members of our legislature, I find it equally difficult to trust a lot of the people out there who will vote without giving any thought to an issue.
from what i have observed there are 3 groups who want this process. Old Flag people, term limit folks and large corporations with money to burn. Not enough itch to scratch.
Post a Comment