Mr. Smith shuns Washington - how conservative are using state and local elections and initiatives to achieve their political objectives - Column

0 Comments | Insight on the News, July 4, 1994 | by Nina Shokraii

While the possible Republican takeover of the House or Senate will dominate the news this election year, the real campaign story of 1994 is the emergence of a strong and widespread conservative movement at state and local levels.

In the 1980s, a conservative with a promising public policy idea might spend months or years trying to convince a Republican White House to endorse it. Today, conservatives who want less government, lower taxes and less spending have nowhere to turn in Washington. Not Congress, not the White House. So activists have begun to push their agendas through state legislatures via the initiative process.

Today, 24 states and thousands of local governments allow voters to collect a set number of signatures and place legislation or constitutional amendments on the ballot. Policy ideas supported by the people, but opposed by entrenched politicians in Washington and state capitals, are picking up steam.

Perhaps the issue that most divides politicians from the rest of the country is term limits. Already 15 states have passed term limit initiatives. This year, voters in Alaska, Maine, Massachusetts and Oklahoma will get a chance to vote on similar legislation as well. Illinois, Idaho, Nebraska, Nevada, Utah and the District of Columbia are working to place this measure on their 1994 ballots as well.

Tax and spending limitation initiatives continue to strike a chord with voters. In November, the Oregon electorate will vote on Measure 5, which requires voter approval of all new or increased taxes. While Nevada Sens. Harry Reid and Richard Bryan are busy pushing legislation on the Hill to increase taxes and spending, Nevada gubernatorial candidate Jim Gibbons is circulating a measure that would require "a two-thirds vote of the legislature prior to increasing taxes." In Missouri, Rep. Mel Hancock is circulating his "Hancock II" initiative to put new taxes to a vote of the people in the state. Groups in Arkansas, Florida, Michigan and North Dakota also are trying to place similar initiatives on their ballots this year. Montanans will vote this fall on whether to suspend an income tax hike the legislature passed last year.

This spring, Congress debated a crime bill which was long on rhetoric and short on substance. In direct contrast, state groups have been circulating initiatives with real muscle. In 1992, voters in Washington state passed the "three strikes and you're out" initiative which puts third-time violent felons in prison for life. In California, a "truth in sentencing" measure requiring prisoners to serve 85 percent of their jail sentence will be on the November ballot, but the measure is so popular a version of it has already been signed into law by Gov. Pete Wilson. Three Oregon legislators are circulating five crime-related initiatives that are likely to appear on the November ballot. Michigan should see a death-penalty amendment and Washington state a measure that would punish criminals who use guns.

In 1992, Colorado made headlines by adopting a "no special privileges to homosexuals" initiative. Through the initiative process, citizens in Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon and Washington state are all fighting to keep sexual orientation off the civil-rights list. Efforts to bar homosexuality from receiving privileged status are so abundant that some states have several groups trying to place different versions of this measure on their ballots.

Although school choice has not passed in any state as an initiative, it is still a popular issue with an increasing number of parents. Groups in Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida and Oregon are fighting to place school choice on their November ballots. However, the real fight for educational scholarships will take place in New Jersey, where the legislature is scheduled to vote on a pilot program for choice for Jersey City.

Even in the states that do not have the power to place initiatives on their ballots, the power often exists at the local and municipal levels. Last year, term limits won with 60 percent of the votes in New York City, while "no special privileges for homosexuals" won in Cincinnati and many other cities. This year, thousands of localities will see term limits, tax limitation and "no special privileges for homosexuals" measures on their November ballots.

Americans dissatisfied with the Washington establishment have taken matters into their own hands. As the preceding list of initiatives and referendums illustrates, the American electorate is more anticrime, antitax and anti-Washington than the men and women they send to Capitol Hill. Seeing no leadership in Washington, they are acting and organizing themselves. Someday the "leaders" will follow.