Editorial: Flood of Amendment Referendums Suggests a Failure in Government

Amending the Florida constitution is a relatively accessible endeavor, at least compared to many other states and certainly when posed against the federal government. As anyone familiar with the process can tell you, there are two sides to this coin and most of them fall squarely and passionately in advocacy for one or the other. I don't know that it's so simple.

In recent years, there has been a swell of proposed amendments and members of the legislature have largely decried the maneuvers as a circumvention of government – and they are right. Politicians have also pointed out that many "issues" are backed by special interests using the referendum (and tons of money) as a tool to influence the public toward buying into something they don't really comprehend. Again, they are mostly right.

However, politicians as a whole are hardly in a position to cry foul. The popularity of referendums to amend the state's constitution is largely a response to the inability of the legislature to enact viable solutions to our biggest problems. They themselves are also the first in line for special interests and their money, and what little they do accomplish demonstrates this clearly.

In many cases, an issue has a special interest on either side of it, each standing to benefit from competing policies. The referendum campaigns are often waged by the side that ended up (or has always been) on the opposite side of the majority party.

Citizens feel marginalized because they are. Public interest does not drive public policy – special interests do. If citizens felt as though they had a voice in the conversation, that contacting their representatives or even traveling to Tallahassee to make their case worked, then the appeal of direct democracy would not be so inviting. I certainly get the impression that most Floridians would like to be able to vote for competent representation, trust them to make the decisions that best benefit their community and call on them when a contentious issue arises, sure that their voice (and vote) is what will be heard.

Yet, as any citizen activist group or freshman legislator can tell you, it is far from being that simple. The majority party bosses set the platform and their "leadership" in the legislature gets there because they deliver it. There is little that a representative in the majority party can do regarding a major issue, once the party has decided its position. As more than one have told me, you won't get very far if you make waves and once ostracized you won't even be able to help your constituents with the little things.

This is of course political cowardice and we should be able to expect representatives who are more concerned with true representation than in doing their party's bidding and voting as they are told, so that they can stay in office until they get into a leadership position. Yes, we should expect more than that, but the astronomical cost of running for office and the near impossibility of winning without either a king's dowry or party support means that the party is right there at the grass roots level, ensuring that you'll only get to choose from candidates who know how they will be expected to behave once in the Capitol.

I imagine there are still politicians who begin in earnest, only to realize the futility was greater than they imagined. They see what becomes of the political outsider and convince themselves that the only way to change the system is from within, nudging it along with each rung they climb. It just seems like the temptation to stay at the trough is too great. Also, there is the constant reminder of the many ex-legislators earning six-figure paychecks in the multitude of Tallahassee careers that do not require a majority vote to keep – jobs reserved for those who showed they could play nice while in office.   

What sort of system does this cesspool create? Look around – the special interests that are aligned with those setting the platform fair well. Those aligned with the other team (or no one in particular) have a Hail Mary option known as the referendum, which happens to also be the only option available to most of the citizenry when it comes to something contentious. It is imperfect and has the potential to be equally disastrous and magnificent, but outside of the inner circle, it is the only game in town.

So, Tallahassee should take a long, hard look at itself before it turns up its nose at this "circumvention" and ask what it is that smells so badly, that their people want to go the long way around the barn. If we had a functioning democracy with a truly representative government I do not believe taxpayers would be so interested in amending our constitution. They'd trust in either the judgment of their representatives or the weight of their constituency, two things that unfortunately seem a little light in these times.