California's frequently amended constitution
State's governing document has grown to 75,000 words.
By Gloria Romero
(From the Orange County Register, July 1, 2013)
As we celebrate the 237th anniversary of our nation's Declaration of Independence, it's a good time to become more familiar with another document that seeks to enshrine the rights of the people: the far-less familiar Constitution of the State of California. Understanding its contents, along with historical circumstances under which provisions were inserted, sheds light on both the workings of California government today and the challenges it portends for fostering a more perfect union in the future.
The U.S. Constitution was adopted in 1787, 11 years after the Declaration of Independence. The California Constitution was adopted in 1849, in advance of attaining statehood, and superseded in 1879 by the current constitution.
A constitution is a basic governing document. Many argue that it should not be easy to alter a government's constitution. Amendments should only occur after thorough debate.
The U.S. Constitution has been amended less than 30 times. By sharp contrast, the California Constitution – 102 years younger – has been amended more than 500 times. California's 1879 constitution is the third- or fourth-longest in the world (depending on the source). It's even been castigated as "the perfect example of what a constitution ought not to be." It runs hundreds of pages and, at 75,000 words, is four times longer than the federal Constitution. Efforts have been made to both revise and curtail its verbosity.
Undoubtedly, California's constitution is bloated. Some provisions micromanage even the most minute of governmental functions, restraining the Legislature from effectively functioning. Yet, proposed amendments keep coming. With a Democratic supermajority in Sacramento, I last counted six constitutional amendments quietly winding their ways through the Legislature – not counting what might appear on next year's ballot.
On the other hand, California's constitution has been hailed as a people's constitution. The right to amend it via a direct vote of the people became a staple a century ago during California's Progressive Era, during which there was widespread public disgust with powerful special interests and their control over elected officials, politics and the economy (sound familiar?). The initiative process was designed as a tool for citizens when they believed legislatures failed to enact laws representative of the people. It was championed by the reformist governor Hiram Johnson in order to empower everyday citizens.
Used moderately until World War II, initiatives have sharply increased in the past several decades.
It is relatively simple to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot: Petitions must be signed by the equivalent of 8 percent of the voters in the most-recent gubernatorial election. That translates to usually less than 1 million signatures in a state of almost 40 million people. Most special interest groups or wealthy individuals can easily qualify ballot measures with a commitment of $1 million.
There have been several efforts to tighten the rules for putting initiatives on the ballot, such as requiring more voter signatures to qualify initiatives and to require that constitutional amendments win 55 percent voter approval, rather than a simple majority. Others argue that ballot measures should be subjected to pre-clearance hearings on their constitutionality.
Several measures have wound up in court, where some have been overturned. Last week's ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on Proposition 8 raises new questions about the obligation of state officials to defend citizen-initiated laws.
Take time this week to read our state's constitution. You might be surprised to learn what's buried in those clauses and even develop new perspectives on what contributes to keeping California dysfunctional – and what's needed to change.
