Pataki Pushes Amendment to Allow Referendums

ALBANY, March 12 - Gov. George E. Pataki cast himself today as a political
outsider combating an ossified Legislature as he proposed a constitutional
amendment that would let citizens bypass their elected leaders and put
initiatives directly on the ballot. Mr. Pataki said the Legislature
lagged far behind popular opinion on issues like revamping campaign finance
laws and streamlining the state's cumbersome school-aid formulas. He said
the proposed amendment would let him take his case on such specific issues
directly to the voters. It would also allow citizens advocating a single
issue, like outlawing abortion, to put their position before the
people. "I have always had confidence in the people of this state," Mr.
Pataki said. "I believe if you lay out the case and make the case to the
people, they are going to do the right thing." The constitutional
amendment is of paramount importance to the leaders of the Independence
Party, who said the governor's stance gave him a large advantage in
competing for their nomination in May. That endorsement would give the
Republican governor, who is seeking a third term, three of the first four
lines on the ballot: Republican, Independence and Conservative.  When he
first ran for governor in 1994, Mr. Pataki campaigned on a promise to amend
the New York Constitution to allow citizens to put initiatives on the ballot
through petitions. In 1995, he introduced such an amendment in the
Legislature, but it died there. Until today, the governor has let the
proposal rest. He faces a tough fight in the Legislature. Assembly
Speaker Sheldon Silver, a Manhattan Democrat, said elected officials were
capable of representing the voters. He added that laws enacted through
referendums often contradicted one another or were struck down in court. "In
California, it's led to full employment for lawyers," he said.  Senator
Joseph L. Bruno, the Republican majority leader, said the Senate would study
the governor's proposal, but he pointed out that in some states, such laws
"have had some disastrous results." Amendments to the State
Constitution must be passed by two separately elected Legislatures and then
by a majority of voters. The earliest it could appear on the ballot would be
in November 2003. Citizens have the authority to put a proposal on the
ballot in 24 states, including California, Florida and Ohio. In the last
century, about 800 state laws were adopted through referendums, from women's suffrage to the abolition of poll taxes. Referendums have led to some policy debacles. Colorado voters, for instance, passed a constitutional
amendment limiting state spending and taxes, but later voted to guarantee
annual increases in school spending. Washington State citizens voted to cut
taxes and then later to spend more on teachers' raises, without offering a
way to pay for the increase. Proposing the amendment now is a shrewd
political move for the governor, even if it never passes. It shores up his
relationship with the Conservative Party, which has long wanted ballot
initiatives. It also makes him the front-runner for the Independence Party
nomination. That would prevent an Independence candidate from siphoning away votes from Mr. Pataki, as B. Thomas Golisano did in 1994 and 1998. Mr.
Pataki's proposed amendment would allow citizens to put an issue on the
ballot if they can collect signatures equal to 5 percent of the votes cast
in the last election for governor, or about 250,000. The petitions would
have to include at least 5,000 signatures in three-fifths of the state's
congressional districts, making it hard for a strictly local issue to be
approved for the ballot. Citizens could also amend the Constitution under
the proposal, but the measure would have to be passed in two consecutive
statewide elections.

Mr. Pataki said he would like to see several of his own proposals that the Legislature has rejected put on the ballot. He specifically mentioned limiting campaign contributions, reducing sentences for drug offenses and doing away with the Board of Regents. Democrats in the Assembly have objections to all three proposals.