Democracy is a wonderful thing, and direct democracy is even better. At least, that was the view of progressive reformers at the turn of the last century who dreamed up new procedures called initiatives, referendums, and recalls -- devices designed to make politicians more responsive to the will of the people.
The idea was that citizens could mobilize themselves. If they could get a certain number of signatures on a petition, they could bring proposals directlyto their fellow citizens. Proposals like -- for example -- recalling a governor.
It seems fitting that America's most recent, most flamboyant, and most absurd example of how direct democracy can go awry has occurred in the very state where the recall was invented. As Mark Twain once said, America is built on a tilt, and everything loose slides to California.
Progressives of a century ago, such as California's then Republican governor Hiram Johnson, never dreamed that a single person's money could buy enough signatures on a petition to force an entire state to go through a recall vote. That would be the reverse of direct democracy.
And yet, that's exactly what happened in California. The $1.7 million Republican Congressman Darrell Issa spent on his drive to recall Gray Davis went mostly to professional signature gatherers who know exactly how to round up the required number.
As originally intended, gathering all those signatures was supposed to be sufficiently difficult that the recall would be used only in those very rare instances where a public official had acted in gross disregard of the public. But now, any governor is fair game at any time, at least in California. All youneed is one very determined and very wealthy person, coupled with a governor whose popularity has sunk for whatever reason and no matter how temporarily. Put together this combustible mix and a valid election can be reversed, and a new governor installed.
Gray Davis wasn't the only loser yesterday. If Californians woke this morning with a headache, it's not surprising. They made a mockery of what their progressive forebearers intended to achieve.
Let's hope they've learned a lesson, and the rest of the country has, too. Direct democracy is a fine idea, as long as it's accompanied by strict limits on what people can spend on it.
