Direct Democracy was the direct involvement of the people to the state government. Supporters of direct democracy say that it limits the influence of politically powerful lobbies and businesses; which is why progressives agree that direct democracy is educating the public in politics. Calls for reform peaked in the Progressive Era due to the public's call for more political involvement; in 1908 progressives amended the state constitution to allow initiatives, referendums, and recall election. The supporters state that California’s recall election is challenging the American democracy, allowing them to be in direct charge of what they would like in a government. Studies have even shown that giving the citizens an option to run their government, or have choices, proved beneficial as it had a positive effect on the voters engagement in the government. Citizens who are exposed to politics are more engaged, informed, and confident than citizens living in initiative states. …show more content…
This occurred during the 2003 California Recall Election, where Republican activist gathered 1.2 million signatures to launch a special election to replace the governor. By the people trying to solve the problem of replacing a governor, they will instead cause another problem of having inexperienced legislature, which can leave the government open to corruption. They also argued that the recall election means that the Californian government has too much power in the hands of the public. Which can have disastrous effects as the voters are not aware of the work the goes in behind the scenes; they don’t understand the complications of the money, time, and affects, their ideas will do. The more you substitute a popular election for checks and balances, the more you go against the