 California has always been the pace-setter in terms of bringing the people in to the governance process. To me, the IMIT initiative process is confusing because you have a lot of jargon that's used. You have a lot of special interest groups that get involved that hide behind different words for who they actually are. The proposals are always too confusing for any regular registered voter to understand. And they probably make it that way to misguide people to sign these things to get on the ballot. After you get home and read the whole thing, the whole pamphlet, you realize, man, did I vote for that? Did I vote for that, you know? And but too late, you know, the vote is already in. Clarity and transparency are really important to me. I'm a little tired of feeling as though I have to study every initiative to find out where the financial footprints are to know who's really behind it and what they have in mind to do. Even if you see who's funding it or who's behind it, it's really, you know, someone else in the shadows who might actually be behind it or it's a group you've never heard of and it sounds all rosy and peachy but really, you know, it's maybe not something that you would really support if you knew where the real money is coming from. The money it takes to have access to the ballot allows groups or people to get to the ballot. You know, some groups can, some groups can't and their ideas aren't necessarily better. It's just that they have money and access. You know, somebody approaches me from the grocery store and they want me to do something. I read it, I signed for it and then they have another one and another one and another one. I know they're getting two dollars for each one of those signatures and I think they don't have any heart in it. They're just getting paid for it. I personally would make it easier so that someone with less money could get something on the ballot. I would love for us to not have to have these battles about the constitutionality of an amendment after it's been voted on. They don't vet it yet until it's voted in, which is silly and then they're going to take the time to do all of this, all of the money that's done and then they go and find it's not constitutional. What a waste of time. Most places allow a legislature to go back and change an initiative after it's been passed. Like every other place but us allows that and most on the front end of initiative allow errors to be fixed in drafting, allow for compromise. We don't permit any of this. Trust in government is a huge problem in California. There's a huge distrust of government and in a way every initiative that's successful is a vote of no confidence in the legislature.