[EL] Help Get Calif. Gas Tax Votes Prop. Off the Ballot?

[Tom Cares]

This wouldn’t have any legs.

I recommend reviewing the 2009 CSC opinion that Prop 8 was not a revision.
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/S168047.pdf

For an amendment to be considered an improperly enacted revision, it must
enact “far reaching changes in the nature of our basic governmental plan.”


On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 5:50 PM D. A. Holtzman <d at lavotefire.org> wrote:

> Hi Election Law List People,
>
>       I’ve refined the argument for blocking the Gas Tax Votes
> proposition (see below), and really hope some of you can offer help.  Please
> let me know what you think.  Or maybe you can refer me to someone who
> might help.
>
>       The measure, Proposition 6, threatens California government, not
> just one gas tax.
>      Prop. 6 seeks to change the California Constitution to require
> automatic votes on *all future* state gas or car taxes.  In addition to
> significantly hobbling one branch of state government, that change would
> set a precedent that could end up crippling all three branches.  So, like
> the “Three Californias” Prop. 9 did before the California Supreme Court
> took it off the ballot, Prop. 6 truly proposes a constitutional revision,
> not an ordinary amendment.  For that reason, and because a constitutional
> revision may not be placed on the ballot by initiative, a lawsuit can get
> Prop. 6 off the ballot.
>
>      The precedent set by Prop. 6 would be awful and could be
> catastrophic.  Imagine if the legislature, agencies, and courts could not
> act on any of a list of subjects without waiting for a statewide election
> and voter approval!  Although it’s true that a state may require local
> voter involvement before some types of local government actions take
> effect, in the United States a *state* government must be sovereign and
> able to act on any subject at any time.
>
>      The California Constitution requires representative democracy as
> well as functioning agencies and courts.  Blocking our government from
> working without waiting for a statewide election and voter approval might
> not split the state into pieces, but it would fundamentally revise the
> Constitution’s functional structure.  In a way, Prop. 6 is worse than
> Prop. 9 was.  Having one broken state government would be worse than
> having three new ones that work.  Prop. 6 could usher in a dysfunctional
> future!
>
>      I really hope some of you will help get a suit to court as soon as
> possible.  California Code offers a window until August 13 to obtain a
> writ of mandate ordering the proposition off the ballot.  So please
> contact me ASAP.
>
>   - David A. Holtzman, M.P.H., J.D.
>     (310) 826 - 7398
>     dahmph at umich.edu
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180802/d58000e4/attachment.html>