Ballot Measures and the Subversion of Democracy

• In Event: 046 - Section on Environment and Technology Roundtable Session (one-hour).
  In Refereed Roundtable: Table 17. Environmental Degradation and Conservation

Abstract

In 1996, Alaskans approved a ballot measure to ban aerial killing of wolves. The state legislature subsequently reinstated aerial wolf hunting. In 2008, another referendum to outlaw aerial hunting appeared on the ballot. For the first time, Alaskans rejected a referendum to ban aerial killing of wolves. After the election, many voters commented that the wording of the ballot measure was ambiguous in that it appeared to indicate that its approval would result in a greater wolf mortality rate. Undergraduate students were randomly assigned to answer survey questions on 1 of the 2 above mentioned ballot measures. Our data indicate that more than 80% of the respondents correctly understood the wording of the 1996 ballot measure, which voters passed with a 58% approval rate. Over 50% of the respondents misinterpreted the wording of the 2008 ballot measure. In 2008, 55% of voters rejected this ballot measure and 45% of voters supported it. Clearly, the wording of a referendum affects the public's understanding of, and their responses to, ballot measures. This, in turn, can result in agents of the state, who control the wording of ballots, having undue influence over the democratic process.

Author

• Alexander Thomas Simon, Utah Valley University