Massachusetts court rules it can’t force a vote.

Posted on December 29, 2006
| buzz-it! | Huff it!

I don’t see how conservatives can complain about a court failing to overreach. “Activist courts” has been the battle cry of the right whenever the courts rule that individuals have rights to speech, equal protection, and privacy, among others.

It’s pretty clear here that the legislature itself is using a political maneuver to get around the requirement to vote on a citizen petition.

According to the Washington Post:

Supporters [of gay marriage] say the civil rights of a minority should not be put to a popular vote.

As I’ve said before, direct democracy, however attractive in theory, has it’s pitfalls. I think this is the legislature recognizing that the bar is set too low. Once the required signatures have been collected [by moneyed interests] the amendment need only pass in the legislature by 25% — two consecutive years — to get on the ballot.

In the absence of the petition project the required vote to pass an amendment is much higher. Some reports I’ve read have it at 2/3 majority.

If there is agreement that the bar for initiative-led constitutional amendments in Massachusetts is too low, it seems like addressing the amendment process itself must become a priority.