America’s Initiative and Referendum Systems: A Brief History
Initiative and referendum system makes its debut in the United States
In the United States, the ballot initiative system, at least core components, date back to as early as 1777. The State of Georgia’s set forth the process for which the Constitution of Georgia was to be amended:
ART. LXIII. No alteration shall be made in this constitution without petitions from a majority of the counties, and the petitions from each county to be signed by a majority of voters in each county within this State; at which time the assembly shall order a convention to be called for that purpose, specifying the alterations to be made, according to the petitions preferred to the assembly by the majority of the counties as aforesaid.
Constitution of Georgia, Ratified February 5, 1777
In 1902 Oregon’s state legislature referred to Oregonian voters a legislative measure which would bring into existence the “Oregon initiative and referendum system.” In 1908, six (6) years after Oregonians first voted for the Oregon initiative and referendum system, Oregonian’s again voted to expand citizen power by approving Oregonian voters right to recall public officials.
Mississippi — twice passed ballot initiative system
The 1890s to 1920s marked the Progressive Era with state voter’s approving the creation and implementation of ballot initiative systems. In 1992, the State of Mississippi became the most recent state to have citizens adopt the ballot initiative process. Although, Mississippi became the most recent state to adopt the ballot initiative process in 1992, this was technically Mississippi voters second time approving a statewide ballot initiative system. The first time Mississippi voters approved the ballot initiative system was 1914. In 1917, the Mississippi State Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the state’s ballot initiative system and citizen passed referendum — which was center of the case. Five (5) years after the Mississippi Supreme Court upholding the constitutionality of the state’s initiative and referendum system in State ex rel. Howie v. Brantley, 113 Miss. 786, 74 So. 662 ,the Mississippi Supreme Court in Power v. Robertson, 130 Miss. 188, 93 So. 769 (1922) ruled “by the forces of reason and conscience to overrule[SIC] the Brantley case, supra, and declare the chapter known as the Initiative Amendment unconstitutional and void.”
United States federal government-initiative and referendum system
Currently, no ballot initiative system exist at the federal level. However, throughout American history attempts have been made to create a federal initiative and referendum system. First, in 1907 Representative Elmer Fulton from Oklahoma introduced House Resolution 44. Rep. Fulton’s bill never even advanced beyond committee. Subsequently, there were two similar resolutions introduced in 1977. On July 11, 1977 Sen. Abourezk (D-S.D.) introduced Senate Joint Resolution 67 ; a day later Rep. Guy Vander Jagt (R-MI) introduced House Joint Resolution 544. Both Sen. Abourezk and Rep. Jagt efforts failed.
Efforts have continued since Sen. Abourezk and Rep. Jagt 1977 attempts. By 2002, Senator Mike Gravel (D-AK) — an original co-sponsor to Sen. Abourezk (D-S.D.) Senate Joint Resolution 67 in 1977 — once again introduced America to the idea of a national ballot initiative system, known as the National Citizen Initiative for Democracy (“NCID”).
Conclusion
The United States has a long history with direct democracy. Direct democracy illuminates the histories of the world’s democracies; while casting a bright light on democracy’s future! The United States current initiative and referendum processes —with variance in process by state — is but one way the ancient Athenian idea of direct democracy remains in tact.
A complex and convoluted process with riddled with many challenges, still provides citizens with: (1) a manner to become civically engaged; (2) work together with their fellow citizens to resolve challenges plaguing their community, county/parish/borough, or state; (3) gain first hand knowledge and experience with the political process; and (4) fulfill the words of Mahatma Gandhi by becoming the change a person wishes to see in the world; thus changing the tendencies in the world!
