The California Proposition System
The California proposition system is a political system that requires its voters to freely establish and vote on various legislation, which is called a kind of direct democracy.
Ballot Initiative Referendum on June 7, 2016
Currently, California has a variety of propositions in multiple voting periods, with some passing and some being defeated. In this scenario, I've chosen the ballot initiative referendum on June 7, 2016. California voters voted on one statewide ballot measure as well as 148 individual ballot proposals on the 50th proposition (Goodman, 129).
Statewide Ballot Measure
Under the statewide ballot measure, the proposition was designed towards allowing the full suspension of the state legislators which comprised of the suspending of salaries and pension benefits. The proposition was greatly approved by the voters.
148 Local Ballot Measures
When it comes to the 148 local ballot measures, the California voters were required to decide on the matter regarding taxes, marijuana, fracking as well as a variety of development projects (Goodman, 129). However, out of the 148 local measures, 107 were approved with the remaining 41 being defeated.
Reasons for Agreeing with Proposition 50
Personally, I agree with the proposition 50 due to a number of reasons. Firstly, without the approval of the proposition, then it would imply that the state law of California would go on to allow the suspension of the legislators whereby, on the other hand, it would not allow the suspending of their salaries, pension benefits as well as some other privileges. Secondly, the proposition approved the banning of fracking as well as a variety of high-intensity oil and gas methods taking for example of acid stimulation. Through banning of fracking, the proposition helped solve many of the critical negative impacts to the society resulting from fracking.
Works Cited
Goodman, Chris Chambers. “Augmenting Transparency in the Ballot Initiative Process: Impacts of the 2014 Reforms on the 2016 Election Cycle.” Chap. L. Rev. 19 (2016): 129. Print
