< PREVIOUS ] [ 1996 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >
When I gaze at my sample ballot, trying to figure out how I'll mark the real thing Tuesday, I start to see a pattern in those amendments, initiatives, propositions and the like.
But we wouldn't even need many of those ballot issues if we'd just settle down and pass one: the Voter Stupidity Amendment.
The exact wording would have to be devised by learned
attorneys, but it would in essence declare that The
People of the State of Colorado hereby declare that they
are too stupid to make decisions.
For instance, there's Referendum C, which allows the state legislature to set qualifications for county sheriffs.
In other words, Colorado voters are too stupid to be trusted to assess potential sheriffs. We might foolishly elect an intelligent citizen who questions the received wisdom of the War on Drugs, or who missed the goose-stepping classes at the training center, or who fails to fill out applications for grants that let state and federal governments set priorities for local law enforcement.
There's the argument that we need more
professionalism
in law enforcement. That trend means
that police agencies function more like occupying armies,
accountable to distant authorities, than like servants and
protectors, accountable to local voters.
Further, in most counties of any size, the sheriff is an administrator, not a beat cop. A retired business executive who's never even written a parking ticket might well do an excellent job of handling budgets and schedules, whereas a detective or patrol officer, no matter how brave or dedicated, might flounder terribly at paperwork and jail management.
But our legislature (elected by us same dimwits who can't handle sheriff candidates) apparently believes that we can't be trusted to make such decisions, and thus this appears on our ballot.
The Voter Stupidity Amendment would also eliminate the latest term-limit proposal, Amendment 12.
The theory of term limits is that we'll get citizen-legislators who, after serving their time in the halls of power, will return to their day jobs, living under the laws they passed. With that prospect ahead of them, they'll behave more sensibly while in office.
The problem is that retired legislators tend to become highly paid lobbyists, and, well, let's face it -- people with money and political influence do not live by the same rules as the rest of us.
Beyond that, term limits are another assumption of voter stupidity. We just aren't bright enough to decide when someone in office should be replaced, you see, and so we've got to put provision after provision into the state constitution.
It also creates a class of citizens who lack the rights of other citizens -- i.e., I could run for governor in 1998, but Roy Romer can't. Why should I enjoy a right that he doesn't?
Amendment 12 goes beyond that, though. It calls for a federal constitution convention -- might as well do it, and eliminate the current hypocrisy of pretending that we have a limited government and a Bill of Rights.
Along the way, Amendment 12 wants our ballots to provide some information beyond the candidate's name and party -- whether or not the candidate took the pledge to support term limits and a constitutional convention.
This presumes that we're too dense to attend forums, read the papers, listen to the radio, or watch TV to find out how a candidate stands on term limits -- or maybe that we'll forget before we get to the polls.
But there's an interesting idea here. Why limit ballot
information to just term limits? We should give every
zealous lobby a chance to label candidates: Very
Pro-Life -- Wants the death penalty for women who procure
abortions,
or Supports economy in government --
Except on defense and prison spending,
or Believes
in protecting the environment -- Especially the greenery at
corporate office parks.
That raises another question, though: How to determine which lobbies get their propaganda on the ballot?
We could allow them to petition, perhaps, but since you can buy petitions in Colorado, why not cut out the middlepeople and just auction it off, with the proceeds going to the state treasury and thereby reducing taxes?
To keep the ballot of a manageable size, we could specify that no more than five issues be listed next to each candidate. Every fall before a general election, the state would hold the auction, which should attract spirited bidding from special-interest groups all over the political spectrum.
And then, properly guided by the additional information placed on our ballots, maybe we could be trusted to vote. Until then, though, we're stuck with variations on the Voter Stupidity Amendment.
< PREVIOUS ] [ 1996 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >