It’s an illustration of the flaws of “direct democracy”, the question voters should be asked is: “Do you want workers in CA to be entitled to meal breaks? Or, are you willing to give up protected meal breaks?”
The overwhelming majority of voters are not motivated enough to properly consider an issue which is going to impact a tiny minority of other people. And people will never feel responsible for their vote.
This is why politicians should exist, to be responsible for these decisions and to be accountable afterwards (in theory). Direct democracy lets everyone wash their hands of any responsibility.
Representative or indirect democracy allows much of the same with politicians who largely aren't held accountable by voters and don't seem to care about their actions on others. All we seem to do is shift the blame to someone with more moral flexibility while also losing power in the process. And our representatives are now selling our power to the highest bidder. At the same time, representative democracies at least help protect minorities against lynch mobs and group think a bit but that's far from guaranteed.
I'm not convinced which system is better or not, personally, or if a better system can exist.
The overwhelming majority of voters are not motivated enough to properly consider an issue which is going to impact a tiny minority of other people. And people will never feel responsible for their vote.
This is why politicians should exist, to be responsible for these decisions and to be accountable afterwards (in theory). Direct democracy lets everyone wash their hands of any responsibility.