One big thing
Rob Bishop, former U.S. Representative for Utah’s 1st District and former Speaker of the Utah House of Representatives, says Utah is flirting with disaster after a decision by the Utah Supreme Court opens the door to a California-style initiative process.
Why it matters
Bishop argues that unchecked ballot initiatives can lead to unintended consequences and governance issues, as seen in California.
“The downside of initiatives is that it’s a yes or no, all or nothing vote,” said Bishop. “One of the reasons why the founders of our Constitution came up with this idea of checks and balance is because there are a lot of good ideas out there that may have an unintended consequence.”
Go deeper
- Bishop emphasizes the importance of legislative review for ballot initiatives, citing potential unintended consequences.
- He warns that initiatives often lack the refinement process typical of legislative bills, which can lead to problematic outcomes.
- The former congressman uses California as a cautionary tale, pointing to issues arising from initiatives passed without proper vetting.
Key points
- Legislative bills typically undergo a multi-year process of refinement and improvement.
- Initiatives, in contrast, are often passed quickly without thorough examination of potential consequences.
- Bishop cites a California initiative that inadvertently led to increased shoplifting and store closures.
The bottom line
Bishop contends that Amendment D is crucial for maintaining Utah’s balanced governance approach and preventing the pitfalls seen in states like California.
Bishop’s stance reflects growing concerns among some Utah politicians about the potential risks of an unchecked initiative process. As the debate over Amendment D intensifies, voters will need to weigh the balance between direct democracy and legislative oversight.
