 |
|||||||||
 |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
August
8, 2005 
VOL.
43, NO. 14Oakland,
CA
Commentary
California earthquakes and special elections
Californians quickly learn that we must be prepared
for earthquakes, droughts, fires and high housing prices. This year, we
face another of those unique California pursuits – complex ballot
initiatives.
On Nov. 8, voters may be asked to decide on union dues, teacher tenure,
low-cost prescription drugs, parental notification prior to an abortion,
redistricting and how California’s budget and electricity should
be managed.
Eight initiatives, all on complicated and weighty questions, have qualified
for the November ballot. Two – redistricting and electricity regulation
– are part of on-going legal battles and probably will not be on
the ballot after all. Currently, another 60 are circulating for future
ballots.
Being prepared for a natural disaster is critical, but being prepared
for deciding on these initiatives can be just as important. Our political
choices have repercussions for years to come, impact our families and
have severe consequences for the poor.
Thanks to my wife, we have bottled water and canned food in our garage,
so I feel somewhat prepared for a disaster. But despite these precautions,
we really haven’t done enough – there’s always something
else more immediate, more fun, or just more “important.”
Like many of us in postponing disaster preparation, our elected officials
don’t always deal with of our state’s long-term challenges.
Progress can be slow, sometimes non-existent, in dealing with critical
issues. Politics is the art of compromise, but finding solutions in today’s
polarized political landscape, often just doesn’t happen.
The initiative process allows the electorate – you and me –
to create law and bypass the legislature. Sometimes it’s the only
way to get things moving, but it can also be a tool of special interests,
a political weapon or a jobs program for political consultants. And, of
course, political decisions do not always reflect our Catholic values.
Take Proposition 187, an anti-immigrant measure from 1994. It was declared
unconstitutional four years after voter approval and it certainly was
not consistent with the commandment to “welcome the stranger”
found in the Gospel of Matthew.
Proposition 13, the legendary 1978 property tax initiative that jumpstarted
the use of initiatives, is now one of the icons of California politics.
Tampering with it – despite some very valid reasons to do so –
has become tantamount to political suicide.
Things are a little different today in Sacramento. The traditional budget
battle fizzled. Not because everyone suddenly joined together in the spirit
of harmony and goodwill – I’d be immediately suspicious if
they did – but because political camps are saving their ammunition
for the November battle.
The special election is part of the Governor’s “Year of Reform”.
He is attempting to fix what he considers “broken” with California,
appealing to the voters to address what he believes the legislature has
not.
The Governor and the legislature are still jockeying for position. They
may come up with a compromise and place additional questions on the ballot
or cancel the election completely.
Between now and Nov. 8, we will be bombarded with slogans, slick campaigns,
misleading advertisements, and other standard electioneering skullduggery.
My preferred method for deciding how to vote is the same method I use
for significant discernment:
My Catholic faith and the traditions of the Catholic Church come first.
All choices have a moral and ethical component to them, so I evaluate
the initiatives on how they will impact the poor, the aged, the sick and
other vulnerable groups.
For instance, Catholic Charities provides emergency utility assistance
to those in need. I’ll look at how the proposed changes in electricity
regulation will impact those most in need.
Since I am not an expert on the vast majority of initiative questions
– I cringe every time I have to decide on some esoteric section
of the insurance code – I’ll turn to trusted, knowledgeable
sources for guidance.
Even partisan analysis or emotion-evoking ads can be useful as long as
the sponsor’s spin is known. Unfortunately, sometimes it’s
harder to find out who the sponsor is than to decide how to vote.
And I like to talk through the issues with people – send up controversial
“trial balloons” to see how people react, what arguments they
raise. My eldest son is particularly valuable for this since he keeps
up on myriad issues every day. Basically, it’s akin to asking the
smartest student in the class for tutoring help.
So let’s do two things this August: get those earthquake supplies
ready and start becoming familiar with the issues we will decide upon
in November.
(Steve Pehanich is the executive director of Catholic Charities of
California. He supports public policy and other initiatives for the 12
Catholic Charities agencies in the state.)
