No headline

I read with interest Rep. Sage Dixon’s “Notes From Boise” column published April 2 in the Bonner County Daily Bee.

He makes an argument for restricting the Initiative process in Idaho that could only be crafted by a politician or a political science student. His argument is long on theory (that a majority of voters could trample on the rights of a minority through the initiative process) and totally lacking in supporting examples in Idaho. He also states that the initiative process is new (since 1912) in Idaho and present in only 21 states. Is “newness” bad? Should we throw out all constitutional amendments (e.g. Second Amendment) because they are new? This is a specious argument.

Rep. Dixon ignores the facts that an initiative must be approved by a majority of voters and then is subject to the will of the Legislature (as demonstrated by the Legislature’s treatment of the recently voter approved Proposition 2 initiative on Medicare expansion).

I wonder if the “minority” that Rep. Dixon is really worried about protecting are legislators who have ignored the wishes of the majority of their constituents?

DONALD E. HANSET

Sandpoint