Question

(american govenrment)

Should states continue to allow ballot initiatives and other forms of direct democracy? Why or why not?

Answer 1

This is largely a matter of opinion and careful consideration of both sides of the argument is important. Personally speaking, for a number of reasons I would argue against the ballot initiatives and other forms of direct democracy. Firstly, it goes against American democracy's long-established principles. When the Republic was established by the Founding Fathers they instituted a system called representative democracy. That means we elect people— senators, congressional members, state legislators — to take decisions on our behalf.

Even though the U.S. population was fairly small, it was felt to be a more effective way of expressing the will of the people. The Founding Fathers were very suspicious of direct democracy because they feared it would lead to mob rule being established; people would act on the moment's spur to make crucial political decisions.

Voters design ballot initiatives, which then circulate a petition for signatures from other registered voters. If the initiative gains enough valid signatures and uses language that conforms to the laws of the state, it is put to approval by the electorate. Depending on the laws in a given state, citizens can use this tool to bring about votes on a proposed state statute or constitutional amendment.

Citizens, too, can gain a referendum on veto, or simply a referendum, by collecting enough signatures to put a law that the state legislature passed on the ballot.