The painful irony of using majority rule to eliminate majority rule.
As friends and families across our state enjoy the relaxing blessings of summer, professional initiative promoter Tim Eyman today introduces I-1185, to reaffirm supermajority domination over state government.
Two days ago we celebrated our nation’s independence from the tyranny of the minority rule. Forty eight hours later it is humiliating to think how Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton would be revolted by this initiative’s VOLUNTARY retreat from majority rule back to minority domination that fueled the Revolutionary War itself.
Regardless of your politics, where in our state you live, or even your values about state government, I ask the public to see that this initiative brings serious, structural harm not to taxes or spending but to the foundational values of democracy. It’s intentional and it carries with it profoundly disingenuous implications.
Even if Washington had the highest taxes in the nation–and even if 100% of taxes were dedicated to funding the state’s paramount duty of public education–and even if state government was the smallest and most efficient organization in the nation–supermajority rules would still be undemocratic, unfair and a shameful rejection of the principle of majority rule with minority protections. It would still empower tyranny of the minority. It would still open the door to subtle political corruption. It would do nothing to lower taxes or improve service for the public because it is a straight jacket of undemocratic inequity. Seventeen state senators rule where 147 legislators once stood. I plead with the once-proud Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln to see that their anti-tax sentiment is becoming a god of assaulting the grand experiment in democracy known as majority rules.
Supermajority rule does not empower democracy, lower taxes or limit government. It emboldens the institutional grip of the status quo. It makes government work less efficiently and effectively because the arrogance of the tyrannical minority assumes control over deliberation and debate, dialogue and compromise.
The legitimate frustration behind people’s willingness to sign a supermajority petition is understandable on the surface. All power in our democracy ultimately rests with the people, and there is value in a finely balanced interaction between direct and representative democracy that honors that critical constitutional reality. Too often the arrogance of those in government presumes to go well beyond the consent of the governed. For example, the Commerce Clause in the U.S. Constitution was not meant to effectively super impose its will as if breathing on its own. If the people so choose to modify our system of government by rewriting our constitution, they have that right as Thomas Jefferson so eloquently reminds us.
However, here at home, using direct democracy and simple majority rule to eviscerate representative democracy and impose supermajorities is a violation of our Founding Fathers’ core values.
It is a painful irony that Mr. Eyman proposes to use majority rule of the people to eliminate majority rule of the people’s own voices, and yet so many patriots do not see the assault from within.
We’re better than this as a state and as a nation.
We are so much more than what we’ve become.
Your partner in service,
Reuven.
Thanks for writing about the dangers that measures like I-1185 requiring supermajority votes poses for a democratic society. Of course one only has to look at who put up over 90% of the million dollars raised to collect signatures on I-1185 to see that it is special interest legislation intended to only benefit a few. Big Oil like Conoco Phillips and Shell Oil and BP along with the Beer Industry are the large contributers. Big Oil opposes a small increase in the Toxic Substances tax to help pay for cleaning up stormwater runoff which is heavily polluted with oil products. The Beer Industry likewise is looking at it’s bottom line, not the need of the state and its residents. Voters need to reject I-1185 as not in their self interest this November.
On Twitter, you claimed that this Initiative is yet again, another desperate attempt to distort democratic republicanism from it’s origins with our Forefathers.
I find the painful irony ONLY in a Democrat displeased over this, when they tend to embrace MAJOR distortions of the Commerce Clause and the Welfare Clause in their endless quest to legislate morality. There are numerous quotes from the Forefathers I could post here illustrating that the excesses of taxation, the embracing of a Welfare State and the manipulation of the currency ALL come in direct “violation” of most of their “core values”.
Not that this is such a partisan issue in my eyes. BOTH parties have spend equal time distorting the Constitution to get the outcomes they so desire. Both have painstakingly snubbed and outright attacked the Constitution while advancing agendas, whether the road is paved with good intentions or not.
I find it curious that you pick and choose which “core values” of the Forefathers you want defend, and in this case, it seems obvious that outsider attempts to dismantle your ability to grow government is what seems to create a passionate response.
-Best