As readers may know, McAllen residents have the opportunity to vote on two consequential propositions around limits to campaign contributions and the powers of initiative, referendum, and recall. The process of getting these propositions on the ballot and the subsequent debate are necessary for vibrant politics.
However, what this experiment in local democracy has shown is that McAllen is also not immune from disinformation. It is altogether legitimate to disagree, but it is not in the spirit of democracy to deliberately mislead voters with manipulative narratives.
Should there be a conversation about the repercussions of changes to campaign contributions? Of course.
One common argument against Proposition A is that it would incentivize the creation of “dark money” groups, otherwise known as political action committees (PACs). The evidence of a sudden rush of PACs in McAllen’s politics after voting for Proposition A is debatable. After all, cities such as San Antonio do make an effort to curb contributions of PACs. More importantly, I would argue that one of the objectives of Proposition A is to call attention to the power of money in our city elections, and even national races. If we vote no, we would be missing the opportunity to ask whoever is running in our elections whether they want to be a “dark money” candidate or a people-powered candidate. That is the power Proposition A offers McAllen residents.
What isn’t a legitimate argument is that McAllen residents were deceived when they voiced their desire to vote on Propositions A and B. There’s a big difference between the community effort of knocking on thousands of doors and having hundreds of conversations with residents and the ethically questionable actions behind the “Save McAllen! Vote No” efforts. Unlike the “Vote No” campaign, the Proposition A and B organizers did not hide behind opaquely named and hastily put-together PACs trying to fake a grassroots campaign.
Opponents also argue that Proposition B could prove costly because of the potential that small groups of residents could force several votes in any given year. The possibility of new expenses for taxpayers is a reasonable debate to have. However, it is not certain that offering residents the power of initiative, referendum, and recall would constitute an affordability problem for a city whose budget numbers more than $652 million. The current cost of voting for these two propositions is less than 1% of the city’s budget. If McAllen residents pay city taxes in any form, they should be granted the power to make changes to the city government via democratic processes.
Again, what isn’t a legitimate argument against these propositions is to insinuate that they would lead to a defunding of our police, an effort to legitimize illegal drugs, or to McAllen becoming a sanctuary city. This is clear disinformation. The proposition language doesn’t mention any of these issues, nor have the organizers said that they plan to pursue any of these efforts. Put simply, Proposition B would give McAllen residents the ability to act when those they elected are not representing them appropriately. Cities such as Laredo, Fort Worth, Plano, Dallas, Austin, and San Antonio all have similar changes made to their city charters. One count put the number of cities with charters that include the ability for citizen ballot measures at over 300. Ultimately, if opponents are so worried about what policies might come then they should do what’s healthiest in a democracy and partake in grassroots advocacy, as was done to get these propositions on the ballot.
The reality is this: We all want McAllen to be its best self. While vigorous debate over these propositions can help improve our city, spreading disinformation harms voters, fuels unnecessary conflict, and directly hinders our ability to build a thriving local democracy.
For me the choice is clear, I would rather live in a city in which the power of individual donors is limited and the people of McAllen are offered the opportunity to participate directly in the future of their city.
Editor’s Note: The above guest column was penned by Joel Corte, a McAllen resident, UT-Rio Grande Valley Masters Graduate in political science, and a volunteer with several local organizations. The column appears in the Rio Grande Guardian with the permission of the author.
