Who Runs The State

Lobbyist Arthur Samish boasted to newspaper columnist Lester Velie that he, Arthur Samish, was more powerful than the governor. This prompted Governor Earl Warren to give an address about Arthur Samish at the San Francisco Press Club. On that occasion Will Aubrey sang the following ditty:

“Who runs the state? You’re going to get the answer.
Who runs the state? It’s plain as can be.
Who runs the state? Is it really Arthur Samish?”
No. It’s the Southern Pacific and the PG&E.”

There is an old saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I do not know that would go that far, but there are certainly times when our attempts to reform a corrupt political system have caused more harm than good. The initiative process in California was an attempt to neutralize the undue influence of the Southern Pacific, Pacific Gas and Electric, and other powerful corporations that had a strangle hold on the state’s economy. It seemed like a good idea at the time. Let the voters override or bypass the state legislature by proposing and passing amendments to the state constitution. The problem is that it takes a good deal of time and money to get such a measure on the ballet and to campaign for it. As a result this seemingly democratic process has become a gold mine for the special interests.

The interests to the left of center typically propose initiatives that mandate expenditures for progressive programs such as pre-school education. Their goals are usually lofty and are feasible in prosperous times. The problem is that those mandates negate the government’s ability cut expenses when austerity seems necessary. The interests to the right of center typically propose measures that give them an economic advantage at the expense of the consumers. I think the damage that causes speaks for itself. Since the initiatives are constitutional amendments it is very difficult to get rid of them after the voters have approved them. The only way to accomplish it is to pass another initiative, and that requires the concerted effort of someone has a lot of time and money to spend.

What brings this to mind is the upcoming primary election and the initiatives now on that ballet. Collectively, those initiatives comprise a very large pile of crap. It is unfortunate that primary elections take place during allergy season because this apparently causes the voters to display a remarkable inability to sniff out the crap buried beneath the perfume the special interests use to disguise the fact that what is being placed on the table is a pile of crap.

One of the current initiatives is proposed by the insurance industry and is designed to gouge consumers who have let their auto insurance lapse at sometime in the past. It sounds much like the old pre-exiting conditions scam used by health insurers. The worst of the bad lot of initiatives, however, is probably the one that is proposed by Pacific Gas and Electric. Yes, that is the same company whose bad behavior prompted the initiative process in the first place. The PG&E proposal requires a two thirds voter approval before a local government can provide electrical services to new customers or establish a community choice electricity program using public funds or bonds. To hell with PG&E! Why should we let them defy our municipalities. Let PG&E provide buckets full of campaign contributions like all the other special interests. Hopefully the voters will smell this fecal material before PG&E rubs their noses in it.

My advice to voters is to remember who has the time, the money and the incentive to place initiatives on the ballet. In other words, vote no whenever there is the slightest doubt about any given initiative. Frankly, I would like to reform the initiative process by making any measure passed a law rather than a constitutional amendment. This would allow the legislature to ameliorate the consequences of the really egregious measures that are passed. Most politicians are not foolish enough change a law the voters have approved unless those politicians are certain that they can demonstrate a compelling need to change that law. Unfortunately, it would take an initiative to accomplish the reform I propose, and I do not know of anyone who has the incentive and resources to do it. So I guess I will just have to continue holding my nose while voting no. Do you think we could get “hell no, not now, not ever” as an option on the ballet? I am afraid you will tell me it would require an initiative.