JOHN YANG: Right now, voters in 24 states and the# District of Columbia can bypass their legislatures## by gathering signatures to get proposed laws# or constitutional amendments on the ballot.## But according to the Associated Press, about# 40 bills in roughly a dozen states are being## considered or have already been signed into law# to restrict this citizen initiative process.

Dane Waters is head of the University of Southern## California's nonpartisan Initiative# and Referendum Institute.

Mr. Waters,## in your view, what's the role of this citizen# ballot initiative in our American democracy?

DANE WATERS, Chair, Initiative and Referendum# Institute: Well, it's a check and balance on## representative government.

It's not a replacement# for it.

And this is what a lot .. understand is that they think that when we have# direct democracy or in the states where it does## exist, that somehow is trying to circumvent# or bypass normal representative government.

But it's not.

It's always been designed# to be a check and balance and a safety## valve for the people to use when the# legislature, for whatever reason,## is unwilling or unable to do# things that the people want.

JOHN YANG: And why are legislatures why are# lawmakers elected lawmakers trying to restrict it?

DANE WATERS: Well, there's always been this# animosity by lawmakers against direct democracy## in the United States ever since the process# has been around.

They see it as an affront to## their power.

But what they seem to forget is# that when they are elected, the people aren't## giving away their sovereign rights, they're# just loaning those rights to the lawmakers,## and they reserve the right to make laws with# the initiative process or direct democracy.

And so this this confrontation between lawmakers# and the people has always been there.

And this## is why we see that the affront and the assaults# on the process that we're seeing, what sorts of.

JOHN YANG: Restrictions are# we talking about that are## being proposed or actually enacted in some laws?

DANE WATERS: Well, you know, everything# from shortening the circulation period,## the amount of time you have to collect signatures,# putting in place distribution requirements,## saying that you have to from every congressional# district or state legislative district,## limiting who can collect signatures, saying# that they can only be registered voters or## they must be living inside the state, limiting# the amount of money that can be in the process,## you name, you know, the size of the font, pretty# much any restriction that you can think of.

The state legislatures have been# pretty creative, but the courts## throughout time have struck down many of these# restrictions as unconstitutional, which is why## lawmakers are getting even more creative in the# restrictions that they're placing on the process.

JOHN YANG: Now, some lawmakers who# are proposing these restrictions say## they're trying to prevent a special interest from# hijacking the process.

What do you say to that?

DANE WATERS: Well, first of all, every# human being on this planet has a special## interest.

Everyone has their own# interest and special interests,## just like any interest have the right to propose# anything.

At the end of the day, it doesn't## matter who is behind a ballot measure.

Only the# citizens of a specific state can vote for it.

But it's just like the state legislature.

You# have special interests.

Whether it's insurance## companies, gambling organizations, or people# who are pro LGBT rights or anti-LGBT rights.## They're always lobbying the state# legislature.

So it makes sense that## the same interest would try to influence# whether a ballot measure passes or not.

JOHN YANG: We spoke to Kelly Hall, the# executive director of the Fairness Project,## which is a progressive group# that's backed dozens of ballot## initiatives across the country.# Let's hear what she had to say.

KELLY HALL, Executive Director, The Fairness# Project: Instead of having a fair fight,## a really public conversation about the issues,## where politicians or other citizens who disagree# on an issue say, let's persuade each other,## let's have a debate.

Instead, they're making# changes to font, size of petitions and how many## you can carry and who's allowed to carry# them.

And that's the way democracy dies.

JOHN YANG: What's your reaction?

DANE WATERS: I think she's 100# percent right.

I mean, when you,## when state legislatures are trying to silence# the people's ability to use direct democracy or## be a check and balance on them, democracy will# suffer.

So she's spot on in what she's saying.

JOHN YANG: You advised ballot campaigns# in about 20 countries around the world.## How do attitudes about this compare# with attitudes in the United States?

DANE WATERS: Well, globally, the expansion# of the direct democracy is there.

I mean,## you know, most lawmakers around the world seem# to not have this animosity toward the citizens,## and they're actually trying to expand the# process.

Even Ukraine, just before the war,## they had just put in place a national# initiative process there to deal with issues,## and then the war took place, and so# they haven't had the chance to use it.

In the United States, there's# this -- as we've talked about,## this constant animosity between lawmakers# and the people where the lawmakers try to## shut the people out of the process.# So around the world, lawmakers tried## to include the people.

In the United States,# lawmakers seem to try to exclude the people.

JOHN YANG: Dane Waters, thank you very much.

DANE WATERS: Thank you for having me.