Ballot Initiatives

In addition to promises from the political parties to give tax rebates, tax breaks and other election year incentives, Montana voters are facing a number of constitutional initiatives on the November ballot.

The Constitutional Convention of the early 1970s did a great job of writing the state document outlining so many of our rights here in Montana. The question voters will have to ask themselves is do these proposals improve our lives?

The answer is simple: Not as a change to the state's Constitution. However, the logic involved seems to contain common sense, and in most cases is being served by an electorate who is active most of the year and not just at the polls.

For instance, CI-97, the Stop Overspending measure, seeks to stop wasteful, out-of-control spending by state government. This initiative caps state spending growth to the combined growth in inflation plus population. If legislators want to exceed the state cap, they have to ask the voters first.

That makes sense, except when the occasional problem evolves. Looking at a history of the state's lawmakers, we've faced this scenario more than not.

While the idea of controlling state spending is undoubtedly flawless, putting government on automatic control seems an attack on representative government. Which is the problem?

Initiative 154 is a reaction to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling earlier this year in which a local government entity seized private property from third-party commercial development deemed important to the area's economic development.

I-154 stops the government from seizing private property for third-person private uses, and it requires just compensation for the property owner when governmental regulation devalues their property and when property is taken legitimately through eminent domain for public use.

This initiative makes sense if protections aren't already in place. The only questionable language in the proposal is the devaluation caused by government regulation. That sounds like anti-zoning, anti-growth policy stuff.

Constitutional Initiative 98 flatly interferes with the judicial system in Montana. It holds judges accountable for their decisions allowing voters to recall a sitting judge.

This proposal is too political. We can ill afford to have the judiciary looking over their shoulders because a decision may be unpopular with some spectrum of the electorate. That happens with every decision.

There is no doubt that "judicial activism" exists at all levels of the political spectrum but not at the levels believed by much of the public.

There is an old philosophy in western states that ballot initiatives to change the state's constitution is something to be weary of, like the first day of the Legislature. - Roger Morris