Expert: Dennis - 11/7/2006

Question
As I cast my votes this morning I had no problem backing the party I chose.  But still, I have to concede thatthere is corruption on both sides of the aisle.  It made me wonder why we always seem to have a to choose between bad and worse (when it comes to corruption)

Why are more things not decided by voters like a referendum?

How does somethingbecome a referendum as opposed to a bill that must be voted on by congress?

I mean, shouldnt more things be voted on directly y the people?  How is that decided?

Answer
Our country's government was designed to be a Republic. Namely, people would represent us. The Founding Fathers were very wary of direct participation of the masses. In the early days, only male landowners could vote, but they could not vote for President or Senator. They voted for people in the State Legislatures and THEY voted for President and Senator. We still don't vote directly for President and Vice-President. States appoint delegates to the Electoral College, and THEY vote for President, after each state tells them (actually suggests - because there is no law that forces them to vote a certain way) who shall receive their electoral votes.

The idea of referenda became more popular as the country grew. The further West you go, the more states you will find will mechanisms for direct voter participation in law-making. States like Colorado and California have Propositions for everything under the sun. This is an outgrowth of the evolution of the referenda process.

In my state of Illinois we can change nothing by referendum except the State Constitution. What state you live in determines how much opportunity you have in "direct democracy." There only federal mechanism for "referendum" is called a Constitutional Amendment.

The easy answer is, the Founding Fathers didn't trust the emotional masses. That is why you can't vote on more laws in your state.