Proposing an amendment to the Oregon Constitution relating to initiative measures.
If passed, HJR11 would alter the landscape of direct democracy in Oregon by raising the bar for initiating legislative changes. Proponents of this bill argue that the updated requirements will encourage more thoughtful and representative proposals, reflecting a larger consensus among the electorate. The bill's emphasis on geographic distribution seeks to ensure that the interests of all regions of the state are considered, potentially preventing urban-centric initiatives that do not represent rural constituencies from overshadowing broader voter sentiment.
HJR11 proposes an amendment to the Oregon Constitution concerning the initiative and referendum processes. Specifically, it seeks to increase the minimum number of signatures required for individuals to propose laws or amendments to the Constitution. For initiative laws, the bill stipulates that signatures must equal at least eight percent of the votes cast for Governor in the last election, while for constitutional amendments, the threshold is set at ten percent. Additionally, signatures must come from qualified voters distributed equally across all congressional districts in Oregon. This amendment aims to ensure broader representation and participation in the initiative process.
The sentiment surrounding HJR11 is mixed, with supporters praising the bill as a necessary reform for fostering a more engaged and responsible electorate. They argue that increasing the signature requirements will prevent the proliferation of poorly conceived measures that could disrupt state governance. Conversely, critics express concerns that such higher thresholds could disenfranchise voters by making it more challenging for grassroots movements to bring forward initiatives. This tension illustrates the ongoing debate about the balance between facilitating direct democracy and ensuring that proposed initiatives have substantial support.
A notable point of contention within the discussions around HJR11 revolves around the idea of accessibility to the legislative process. Critics worry that raising the signature requirements may disproportionately impact marginalized groups and small organizations that lack extensive resources for signature gathering. This could lead to a democratic deficit, where only well-funded groups can afford to meet the new standards, thereby stifling diverse voices in government. Advocates for maintaining the current thresholds argue that the bill could undermine the foundational principles of participatory governance established in Oregon.