I'm pretty tired of the referendum process. We do not have a direct democracy, but you wouldn't know that living in California where every November you're asked to make serious policy decisions with very little information or expertise available. The founders chose a representative democracy for good reasons. There are a lot of feel good measures on the ballot this year that seem so logical that it makes me nervous. If these measures are so great, why can't the legislature pass them? Between the deceptive advertising and the convoluted wording of the measures, I just don't believe people, starting with me, are qualified to make these choices and truly understand all the repercussions. That's why we elect Representatives whose full time job is to do this for us.
I've been reading a lot of Ely and other democratic theorists for my paper about deliberative democracy and the Internet. I've decided that I will only engage in lawmaking outside the legislative process (i.e. referenda) if it meets the Carolene Products footnote 4 test or, to take it a step further, where substantial rights are at issue.
So I'll consider redistricting, because I'm not sure we can trust legislators to make decisions that directly affect their job security. I'll consider the abortion question because it’s a matter of substantial rights. If there are any discrete and insular minorities who have rights at stake, I will consider their requests. However I absolutely will have nothing to do with items that address teachers, unions, deregulation, etc. These are all well- represented interests that should fight it out before legislatures, not in media blitzes that convey misleading information.
If you are planning to vote in California, you may want to check out Jennifer Granick's slate card for next weeks election. It's a well-researched footnoted analysis that is extremely useful, even if you disagree with her.