Remember the scene in “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off” where a disinterested teenager is passed out and drooling on his desk during roll call? (“Bueller … Bueller … Bueller … .”)
Well, a similar episode played out in my kitchen a couple of weeks back as I was attempting to read through that monstrosity called the “blue book.”
Upon awakening, I slogged on for five minutes before realizing the Spanish on the reverse side was far more entertaining – probably because I don’t understand the language. And to cut a long story short, “The Office” was about to start.
We all have our priorities.
We also all have a saturation point. Mine kicked in a few weeks ago when I was subjected to the umpteenth Marilyn Musgrave/Angie Paccione campaign ad polluting pristine television airtime here in Denver.
I never thought I’d be jonesing for one of those appalling local used car spots, but they are a considerable step up in quality.
Political groups don’t even have the decency to name themselves honestly anymore. Instead, we’re left with saccharine titles that have as much to do with their causes as reality television does with reality – Coloradans for Life and Fairness and Equality and Marriage and Responsible Reform.
While I deride the process, I also understand it’s our responsibility to do the research, look past the nonsense and make a decision. But for those of you with a life, I’m not sure how you could possibly find the time to unravel so many issues.
Which brings me to the most abstract ballot item on this year’s slate: Amendment 38. I’ve asked around, and no one – or rather, no ordinary human being – can understand what’s involved. Something about making it easier for citizens to propose initiatives at all levels of government, though the blue book contains much more.
My first thought: If we’re going to allow even more petitions, does this mean I’ll be sitting on my porch five years from now, shotgun in hand, shouting at the mailman carrying the Tolstoy-sized blue book to “git off my land?”
Not so, says Dennis Polhill, a senior fellow at the Independence Institute, co-
author of Amendment 38 and a new issue paper on petition history.
Amendment 38 doesn’t necessarily mean more petitions, he claims, because it’s the “threat in its exercise,” not the actual petition, that keeps politicians in line.
And for those who say it’s “too easy” to petition, Polhill suspects they’ve never had to collect a signature in their lives.
Polhill believes that legislators have an aversion to the initiative process because they view that it intrudes on a monopoly to legislate.
We’ve also heard that petitions only “clutter” the Colorado Constitution. But Polhill points out that only 42 initiated amendments have been approved in the 94-year history of the process. (And isn’t it interesting how activists are always selectively worried about constitutional clutter? “Clutter” is anything you oppose.)
And while Polhill’s underlying reasons may be sound, I’m not sure I’m into more homework.
Yes, I understand that petitioning government is an important tool in keeping politicians honest and giving citizens redress. But we do live in a representative democracy for a reason, and surely there is a need to theeesadkjsaghdauddddddddddkhgkfduyfgftuolfygu … .
(Sorry about that; I dozed off again.)
I don’t know, maybe I just believe we should be stuck with our bad electoral choices. A price to pay for making mistakes and not paying attention.
And since “The Office” is on Thursdays and “Project Runway” has already been decided, I may even go vote on Tuesday, Nov. 7, and make some more mistakes. This time using the vaunted “catch a tiger by his toe” method I often employ in years of distress.
Because, for the first time in my life, voting feels a lot like homework.
(For more information on Amendment 38, visit the “no” folks at www.voteno38.com and the “yes” people at PRA2006.com.)
David Harsanyi’s column appears Monday and Thursday. He can be reached at 303-954-1255 or dharsanyi@denverpost.com.
