View source for Referendum

{{short description|Direct vote on a specific proposal}}
{{use dmy dates|date=November 2024}}
{{multiple image
| perrow            = 1
| total_width       = 259
| image1            = Bulletin référendum Cote d'ivoire 2016.jpg
| image2            = Pike Place Market Initiative flyer, 1971 (48880312513).jpg
| image3            = Referendum-2-giugno scheda elettorale.jpg
| image4            =
| image5            =
| image6            =
| footer            = From top to bottom: ballots for the [[2016 Ivorian constitutional referendum]]; flyer for a 1971 American referendum; the [[1946 Italian institutional referendum]] deciding on republic or monarchy.
}}
{{Direct Democracy}}
{{Elections}}
{{politics}}

A '''referendum''', '''plebiscite''', or '''ballot measure''' is a [[Direct democracy|direct]] [[vote]] by the [[Constituency|electorate]] (rather than their [[Representative democracy|representatives]]) on a proposal, law, or political issue.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/plebiscite |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120712195247/http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/plebiscite |url-status=dead |archive-date=July 12, 2012 |title=Definition of Plebiscite |publisher=Oxford Dictionaries |access-date=2016-08-23}}</ref> A referendum may be either ''binding'', resulting in the adoption of a new [[policy]], or ''consultive'' (or ''advisory''), functioning like a large-scale [[opinion poll]].

==Etymology==

'Referendum' is the [[gerundive]] form of the [[Latin language|Latin]] verb {{wikt-lang|la|referre}}, literally "to carry back" (from the verb {{wikt-lang|la|ferre}}, "to bear, bring, carry" plus the inseparable [[prefix]] {{lang|la|re-}}, here meaning "back"<ref name=":0">Marchant & Charles, Cassell's Latin Dictionary, 1928, p. 469.</ref>). As a gerundive is an [[adjective]],<ref name=":1">A gerundive is a verbal adjective (Kennedy's Shorter Latin Primer, 1962 edition, p. 91.)</ref> not a [[noun]],<ref>A [[gerund]]  is a verbal noun (Kennedy's Shorter Latin Primer, 1962 edition, p. 91.) but has no nominative case, for which an infinitive ({{lang|la|referre}}) serves the purpose</ref> it cannot be used alone in Latin, and must be contained within a context attached to a noun such as {{lang|la|Propositum quod referendum est populo}}, "A proposal which must be carried back to the people". The addition of the verb {{wikt-lang|la|sum}} (3rd person singular, {{lang|la|est}}) to a gerundive, denotes the idea of necessity or compulsion, that which "must" be done, rather than that which is "fit for" doing. Its use as a noun in English is not considered a strictly grammatical usage of a foreign word but is rather a newly coined English noun, which follows English grammatical usage, not Latin grammatical usage. This determines the form of the plural in English, which according to English grammar should be "referendums". The use of "referenda" as a plural form in English (treating it as a Latin word and attempting to apply to it the rules of Latin grammar) is unsupportable according to the rules of both Latin and English grammar. The use of "referenda" as a plural form is posited hypothetically as either a gerund or a gerundive by the ''[[Oxford English Dictionary]]'', which rules out such usage in both cases as follows:<ref name=":2">Oxford English Dictionary:  'Referendum'</ref>

<blockquote>''Referendums'' is logically preferable as a plural form meaning 'ballots on one issue' (as a Latin gerund,<ref name=":3">a [[gerund]] is a verbal noun (Kennedy's Shorter Latin Primer, 1962 edition, p. 91.) but has no nominative case, for which an infinitive (''referre'') serves the purpose. It has only accusative, genitive, dative and ablative cases (Kennedy's Shorter Latin Primer, 1962 edition, pp. 91–92.)</ref> referendum has no plural). The Latin plural gerundive 'referenda', meaning 'things to be referred', necessarily connotes a plurality of issues.<ref name=":4">i.e. ''Proposita quae referenda sunt popolo'', "Proposals which must be carried back to the people"</ref></blockquote>

It is closely related to [[political agenda|agenda]], "those matters which must be driven forward", from {{wikt-lang|la|ago}}, to impel or drive forwards; and [[memorandum]], "that matter which must be remembered", from {{wikt-lang|la|memoro}}, to call to mind, [[corrigenda]], from {{wikt-lang|la|rego}}, to rule, make straight, those things which must be made straight (corrected), etc.

The term 'plebiscite' has a generally similar meaning in modern usage and comes from the Latin ''plebiscita'', which originally meant a decree of the ''[[Plebeian Council|Concilium Plebis]]'' (Plebeian Council), the popular assembly of the [[Roman Republic]]. Today, a referendum can also often be referred to as a plebiscite, but in some countries the two terms are used differently to refer to votes with differing types of legal consequences.<ref name="Green" />

In Australia, a 'referendum' is often said to be a vote to change the federal constitution and 'plebiscite' a vote which does not affect the federal constitution.<ref name="Green">{{cite web | url=http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2015/08/plebiscite-or-referendum-whats-the-difference.html | title=Plebiscite or Referendum – What's the Difference | publisher=ABC | date=12 August 2015 | access-date=23 August 2015 | author=Green, Antony | archive-date=13 August 2015 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150813234421/http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2015/08/plebiscite-or-referendum-whats-the-difference.html | url-status=live }}</ref> However, this is erroneous as not all federal referendums have been on constitutional matters (such as the [[1916 Australian conscription referendum]]), and state votes that likewise do not affect either the federal or state constitution are frequently said to be referendums (such as the [[2009 Western Australian daylight saving referendum]]). Historically, they are used by Australians interchangeably and a plebiscite was considered another name for a referendum.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article108757304 |title=The Referendum  |newspaper=[[The Evening News (Sydney)|Evening News]] |issue=9452 |location=New South Wales, Australia |date=21 September 1897 |access-date=26 August 2020 |page=4 |via=National Library of Australia}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article163803818 |title=Government by Plebiscite. |newspaper=[[The Sydney Mail and New South Wales Advertiser]] |volume=LXV |issue=1960 |location=New South Wales, Australia |date=29 January 1898 |access-date=26 August 2020 |page=217 |via=National Library of Australia}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article227144727 |title=The Plebiscite or Referendum. |newspaper=[[The Bendigo Independent]] |issue=12,464 |location=Victoria, Australia |date=3 December 1910 |access-date=26 August 2020 |page=4 |via=National Library of Australia}}</ref>

In Ireland, 'plebiscite' referred to the vote to adopt its constitution,  but a subsequent vote to amend the constitution is called a 'referendum', as is a poll of the electorate on a non-constitutional bill.

== History ==
The name and use of the 'referendum' is thought to have originated in the [[Switzerland|Swiss]] canton of [[Graubünden]] as early as the 16th century.<ref>Barber, Benjamin R.. ''The Death of Communal Liberty: A History of Freedom in a Swiss Mountain Canton''. Princeton University Press, 1974, p. 179.</ref><ref>Vincent, J.M.. ''State and Federal Government in Switzerland'', Johns Hopkins University Press, 2009, p.&nbsp;122</ref>

After a reduction in the number of referendums in the Mid-twentieth century, the referendum as a political tool has been increasing in popularity since the 1970s. This increase has been attributed to [[dealignment]] of the public with political parties, as specific policy issues became more important to the public than party identifiers.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Silagadze |first1=Nanuli |last2=Gherghina |first2=Sergiu |date=January 2020 |title=Referendum Policies across Political Systems |journal=The Political Quarterly |volume=91 |issue=1 |pages=182–191 |doi=10.1111/1467-923x.12790 |s2cid=213618720 |issn=0032-3179|doi-access=free }}</ref>

==Types==

=== Classification ===
The term "referendum" covers a variety of different meanings, and the terminology is different depending on the use. A referendum can be binding or advisory.<ref>{{cite book |pages=2–3 |title=The Dynamics of Referendum Campaigns: An International Perspective|chapter=Context, Elites, Media and Public Opinion in Referendums: When Campaigns Really Matter|last= de Vreese |first=Claes H. |isbn=9780230591189 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wHuGDAAAQBAJ |date= 2007 |publisher= Palgrave Macmillan}}
</ref> In some countries, different names are used for these two types of referendum. Referendums can be further classified by who initiates them.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Serdült|first1=Uwe|last2=Welp|first2=Yanina|date=2012|title=Direct Democracy Upside Down|url=http://www.tfd.org.tw/export/sites/tfd/files/publication/journal/dj0801/004.pdf|journal=Taiwan Journal of Democracy|volume=8|issue=1|pages=69–92|doi=10.5167/uzh-98412|access-date=2015-03-24|archive-date=2015-04-02|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150402104503/http://www.tfd.org.tw/export/sites/tfd/files/publication/journal/dj0801/004.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>

David Altman proposes four dimensions that referendums can be classified by:<ref>{{Cite web|title=Direct Democracy Worldwide|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288427223|access-date=2021-08-29|website=ResearchGate|language=en}}</ref>

* [[Mandatory referendum|Mandatory]] (legally required) vs [[Optional referendum|Optional]] (ad hoc)
* Binding vs consultative
* [[Popular initiative|Citizen initiated]] (bottom-up) vs [[Authorities referendum|Authorities initiated]] (top-down)
* Proactive (proposing a change) vs reactive (preventing a change)

=== Mandatory referendums ===
{{Main|Mandatory referendum}}
A [[mandatory referendum]] is a class of referendum required to be voted on if certain conditions are met or for certain government actions to be taken. They do not require any signatures from the public. In areas that use referendums a mandatory referendum is commonly used as a legally required step for ratification for constitutional changes, ratifying international treaties and joining international organizations, and certain types of public spending.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Design and Political issues of Referendums –|url=http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/ese/ese08/ese08a/ese08a02|access-date=2020-06-11|website=aceproject.org|archive-date=2020-05-02|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200502105042/http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/ese/ese08/ese08a/ese08a02|url-status=live}}</ref>

Typical types of mandatory referendums include:

* Constitutional changes: Some countries or local governments choose to enact any constitutional amendments with a mandatory referendum. These include [[Referendums in Australia|Australia]], [[Ordinary referendum|Ireland]], [[Voting in Switzerland|Switzerland]], Denmark, and 49 of the 50 [[U.S. state]]s (the only exception is [[Delaware]]).
* [[Financial referendum]]: Many localities require a referendum in order for the government to issue certain bonds, raise taxes above a specified amount, or take on certain amounts of debt. In [[California]] for example, the state government may not borrow more than $300,000 without a public vote in a statewide bond [[California ballot proposition|proposition]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=Statewide bond propositions (California)|url=https://ballotpedia.org/Statewide_bond_propositions_(California)|access-date=2020-06-11|website=Ballotpedia|language=en|archive-date=2020-12-22|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201222220011/https://ballotpedia.org/Statewide_bond_propositions_(California)|url-status=live}}</ref>
* International relations: Switzerland has mandatory referendums on enacting [[Treaty|international treaties]] that have to do with [[Military alliance|collective security]] and joining a supranational community. This type of referendum has only occurred once in the country's history: a failed attempt in 1986 for Switzerland to join the [[United Nations]].<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Goetschel|first1=Laurent|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4Ok3SLA1ndEC&q=mandatory+referendum+switzerland+treaty+security&pg=PA40|title=Swiss Foreign Policy: Foundations and Possibilities|last2=Bernath|first2=Magdalena|last3=Schwarz|first3=Daniel|date=2004|publisher=Psychology Press|isbn=978-0-415-34812-6|language=en}}</ref>
* [[War referendum]]: A hypothetical type of referendum, first proposed by [[Immanuel Kant]], is a referendum to approve a declaration of war in a [[war referendum]]. It has never been enacted by any country, but was debated in the United States in the 1930s as the [[Ludlow Amendment]].

=== Optional referendum ===
{{Main|Optional referendum}}
An [[optional referendum]] is a class of referendums that is put to the vote as a result of a demand. This may come from the executive branch, legislative branch, or a request from the people (often after meeting a signature requirement).

Types of optional referendums include:

* [[Legislative referral|Authorities plebiscite]]: Also known as a legislative referral, are initiated by the legislature or government. These may be advisory questions to gauge public opinion or binding questions of law.
* [[Popular initiative]] or Initiative referendum: A citizen-led process to propose and vote on new laws.
* [[Popular referendum]]: A citizen-led process to oppose and strike down existing laws.
* [[Recall election|Recall referendum]]:  A procedure to remove elected officials before the end of their [[term of office]]. Depending on the area and position, a recall may be for a specific individual, such as an individual legislator, or more general such as an entire legislature.

== Rationale ==
From a political-philosophical perspective, referendums are an expression of [[direct democracy]], but today, most referendums need to be understood within the context of [[representative democracy]]. They tend to be used quite selectively, covering issues such as changes in voting systems, where currently elected officials may not have the legitimacy or inclination to implement such changes.

==By country==
{{Further|Referendums by country}}
Since the end of the 18th century, hundreds of national referendums have been organised in the world;<ref>{{in lang|fr}} Bruno S. Frey et Claudia Frey Marti, ''Le bonheur. L'approche économique'', [[Presses polytechniques et universitaires romandes]], 2013 ({{ISBN|978-2-88915-010-6}}).</ref> almost 600 national votes have been held in [[Voting in Switzerland|Switzerland]] since its inauguration as a [[Modern history of Switzerland|modern state in 1848]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/explore-600-national-votes_how-direct-democracy-has-grown-over-the-decades/41481992 |title=How direct democracy has grown over the decades |author=Duc-Quang Nguyen |publisher=swissinfo.ch – a branch of the Swiss Broadcasting Corporation SRG SSR |date=17 June 2015 |location=Berne, Switzerland |access-date=2016-01-28 |archive-date=2016-08-06 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160806005325/http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/explore-600-national-votes_how-direct-democracy-has-grown-over-the-decades/41481992 |url-status=live }}</ref> [[Italy]] ranks second with 78 [[Referendums in Italy|national referendums]]: 72 popular referendums (51 of which were proposed by the [[Radical Party (Italy)|Radical Party]]), 4 constitutional referendums, [[1946 Italian institutional referendum|one institutional referendum]] and [[1989 Italian advisory referendum|one advisory referendum]].<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://elezionistorico.interno.it/index.php?tpel=F | title=Dipartimento per gli Affari Interni e Territoriali | access-date=2017-10-13 | archive-date=2017-10-26 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171026045058/http://elezionistorico.interno.it/index.php?tpel=F | url-status=live }}</ref>

==By issue==
{{Further|Category:Referendums by issue}}

===Civil rights referendum===
{{Excerpt|Civil rights referendum|only=paragraph}}

===Financial referendum===
{{Excerpt|Financial referendum|only=paragraph}}

===Mining referendum===
{{Excerpt|Mining referendum|only=paragraph}}

===Independence referendum===
{{Excerpt|Independence referendum|only=paragraph}}

===Referendums related to the European Union===
{{Excerpt|Referendums related to the European Union|only=paragraph}}

== Design and procedure ==

=== {{anchor|Mutiplechoice}}<!--[[Preferendum]] and [[Multiple-choice referendum]] redirect here-->Multiple-choice referendums ===
{{category see also|Multiple-choice referendums}}
A referendum usually offers the electorate a straight choice between accepting or rejecting a proposal. However some referendums give voters multiple choices, and some use transferable voting. This has also been called a [[wiktionary:Preferendum|'''preferendum''']] when the choices given allow the voters to weight their support for a policy.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Reybrouck |first=David Van |date=2023-03-16 |title=Democracy's Missing Link: The "preferendum" – a method for citizens to rate and rank policy ideas – would turn citizen concerns into government action. |url=https://www.noemamag.com/democracys-missing-link |journal=[[Noema]] |language=en-US |access-date=2023-11-06 |archive-date=2023-11-06 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231106011414/https://www.noemamag.com/democracys-missing-link/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

In [[Switzerland]], for example, multiple choice referendums are common. Two multiple choice referendums were held in [[Sweden]], in 1957 and in 1980, in which voters were offered three options. In 1977, a referendum held in [[Australia]] to determine a new [[Advance Australia Fair|national anthem]] was held, in which voters had four choices. In 1992, New Zealand held a five-option referendum on their electoral system. In 1982, Guam had a referendum that used six options, with an additional blank option for those wishing to (campaign and) vote for their own seventh option.

A multiple choice referendum poses the question of how the result is to be determined. They may be set up so that if no single option receives the support of an absolute [[majority]] (more than half) of the votes, resort can be made to the two-round system or [[instant-runoff voting]], which is also called IRV and PV.

In 2018 the Irish [[Citizens' Assembly (Ireland)|Citizens' Assembly]] considered the conduct of future [[referendums in Ireland]], with 76 of the members in favour of allowing more than two options, and 52% favouring preferential voting in such cases.<ref name="citizensassembly_referenda">{{cite web|url=https://www.citizensassembly.ie/en/Manner-in-which-referenda-are-held/Manner-in-which-referenda-are-held.html|title=Manner in which referenda are held|publisher=Citizens' Assembly|access-date=22 March 2018|archive-date=23 March 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180323031432/https://www.citizensassembly.ie/en/Manner-in-which-referenda-are-held/Manner-in-which-referenda-are-held.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Other people regard a non-majoritarian methodology like the [[Modified Borda Count]] (MBC) as more inclusive and more accurate.

Swiss referendums offer a separate vote on each of the multiple options as well as an additional decision about which of the multiple options should be preferred. In the Swedish case, in both referendums the 'winning' option was chosen by the [[First Past the Post electoral system|Single Member Plurality]] ("first past the post") system. In other words, the winning option was deemed to be that supported by a [[plurality (voting)|plurality]], rather than an absolute majority, of voters. In the 1977 Australian referendum, the winner was chosen by the system of preferential [[instant-runoff voting]] (IRV). Polls in Newfoundland (1949) and Guam (1982), for example, were counted under a form of the [[two-round system]], and an unusual form of TRS was used in the 1992 New Zealand poll.

Although [[California]] has not held multiple-choice referendums in the Swiss or Swedish sense (in which only one of several counter-propositions can be victorious, and the losing proposals are wholly null and void), it does have so many yes-or-no referendums at each election day that conflicts arise. The State's constitution provides a method for resolving conflicts when two or more inconsistent propositions are passed on the same day. This is a de facto form of [[approval voting]]—i.e. the proposition with the most "yes" votes prevails over the others to the extent of any conflict.

Other voting systems that could be used in multiple-choice referendum are [[Condorcet method]] and [[quadratic voting]] (including [[Quadratic voting#Quadratic funding|quadratic funding]]).

===Electronic referendum===
{{Excerpt|Electronic referendum|only=paragraph}}

== Participation quorum ==
[[File:Nedko.Selakov-Utopics-photo-G.Perrenoud.jpg|thumb|Nedko Solakov's artistic and humouristic project "Référendum against référendums", for the Swiss Sculpture Exhibition Utopics in 2009]]
Participation [[quorum]] - the additional requirement that a certain minimum number of votes must be cast in order for a referendum to be legally valid - means that it is in the interests of a proposal’s opponents to abstain rather than to vote against it, so that the quorum is not met.<ref name=CGPS>{{cite web |last1=European Commisssion for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) |title=Code for good practice on referendums (revised), p. 28|url=https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2022)015-e |website=Venice Commission of the Council of Europe |publisher=Council of Europe}}</ref> The opponents need only desert the ballot box in order to impose their viewpoint, even when they are very much in the minority.<ref name=CGPS/> All others who are not voting for other reasons, including those with no opinion, are effectively also voting against the referendum.

The participation quorum requirement encourages a host of controversial election practices such as falsifing the turn-out rate,<ref name=CGPS/> voter suppression and manipulating the date of the referendum to reduce turnout. It has been shown both empirically and mathematically that a participation quorum requirement reduces turnout to below the quorum theshold, which is known as the "quorum paradox" (a form of the [[Participation criterion|no-show paradox]]).<ref>{{cite web |last1=Herrera |first1=Helios |last2=Mattozzi |first2=Andrea |title=Quorum and turnout in referenda |url=https://ssrn.com/abstract=1003803 |website=SSRN |access-date=8 November 2025}}</ref><ref name="r277">{{cite journal | last1=Kouba | first1=Karel | last2=Haman | first2=Michael | title=When do voters boycott elections with participation quorums? | journal=Public Choice | volume=189 | issue=1–2 | date=2021 | issn=0048-5829 | doi=10.1007/s11127-021-00885-y | pages=279–300 | url=https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11127-021-00885-y | access-date=27 July 2025| url-access=subscription }}</ref>

The "quorum paradox" arises from the fact that, unlike in deliberative bodies such as parliaments—where a vote can be postponed to a later meeting if a quorum is not reached—referendums cannot be rescheduled.

An example of the participation quorum phenomenon is the [[2005 Italian fertility laws referendum]], in which the opposition to the proposed loosening of laws on research on [[embryo]]s and on allowing [[In vitro fertilisation|in-vitro fertilization]], campaigned for people to abstain from voting to drive down turnout. Although a majority of people voted yes for the changes in the law, the results were invalid because participation was low.<ref name=":4" />

The European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) recommends against any quorum requirements in its [https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2022)015-e Code for Good Practice on Referendums]<ref>{{cite web |last1=European Commisssion for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) |title=Code for good practice on referendums (revised), p18 |url=https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2022)015-e |website=Venice Commission of the Council of Europe |publisher=Council of Europe}}</ref>

== Disputes ==
Important referendums are frequently challenged in courts. In pre-referendum disputes, plaintiffs have often tried to prevent the referendum to take place. In one such challenge, in 2017, the [[Constitutional Court of Spain|Spanish Constitutional Court]] suspended the [[Catalonia]]'s [[2017 Catalan independence referendum|independence referendum]].<ref>{{Cite news|date=2017-09-08|title=Spain Catalonia: Court blocks independence referendum|language=en-GB|work=BBC News|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41196677|access-date=2021-11-21|archive-date=2020-11-12|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201112023031/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41196677|url-status=live}}</ref> In post-referendum disputes, they challenge the result. British courts dismissed post-referendum challenges of the [[2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum|Brexit]] referendum.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2018-12-10|title=High Court rejects challenge to have Brexit referendum result declared void|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-high-court-case-legal-challenge-referendum-vote-leave-spending-theresa-may-eu-a8676226.html|access-date=2021-11-21|website=The Independent|language=en|archive-date=2021-11-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211121140103/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-high-court-case-legal-challenge-referendum-vote-leave-spending-theresa-may-eu-a8676226.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

[[International court|International tribunals]] have traditionally not interfered with referendum disputes. In 2021, the [[European Court of Human Rights]] extended its jurisdiction to referendums in its judgment ''[[Toplak and Mrak v. Slovenia]]'', initiated by two [[Disability|disabled]] voters over [[polling place]] [[Accessibility|access]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=ECHR ruling 'has Europe-wide implications' on disability|url=https://www.lawsociety.ie/gazette/top-stories/2021/10-october/echr-ruling-has-europe-wide-implications-on-disability|access-date=2021-11-21|website=www.lawsociety.ie|archive-date=2021-11-09|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211109234540/https://www.lawsociety.ie/gazette/top-stories/2021/10-october/echr-ruling-has-europe-wide-implications-on-disability|url-status=live}}</ref>

==Criticisms==

===Criticism of populist aspect===
[[File:Odessa Russian Sring 20140330 07.JPG|thumb|Pro-Russian protesters in [[Odesa]], Ukraine, demanding a referendum, March 30, 2014]]
[[File:20150703 Greek Referendum Demonstration for NO syntagma square Athens Greece.jpg|thumb| [[2015 Greek bailout referendum]] Demonstration for "NO" vote, [[Syntagma Square]], [[Athens]], Greece ]]

In Political Governance states that voters in a referendum are more likely to be driven by transient whims than by careful deliberation, or that they are not sufficiently informed to make decisions on complicated or technical issues.<ref>{{Cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kzV4V59udu8C | isbn=9788182053175 | title=Political Governance: Political theory | year=2005 | publisher=Gyan Publishing House | access-date=2023-03-19 | archive-date=2023-11-06 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231106011659/https://books.google.com/books?id=kzV4V59udu8C | url-status=live }}</ref> Also, voters might be swayed by [[media coverage]], [[propaganda]], strong personalities, intimidation, and expensive advertising campaigns.<ref name="h444">{{cite journal | last1=Arbour | first1=Brian K. | last2=Hayes | first2=Danny | title=Voter Turnout in the California Recall: Where Did the Increase Come From? | journal=American Politics Research | volume=33 | issue=2 | date=2005 | issn=1532-673X | doi=10.1177/1532673X04272430 | pages=187–215 | url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1532673X04272430 | access-date=27 July 2025| url-access=subscription }}</ref> [[James Madison]] argued that direct democracy is the "[[tyranny of the majority]]".

Some opposition to the referendum has arisen from its use by dictators such as [[Adolf Hitler]] and [[Benito Mussolini]] who, it is argued,<ref>{{cite book|last1=Qvortrup|first1=Matt |title=Direct Democracy: A Comparative Study of the Theory and Practice of Government by the People|isbn=978-0-7190-8206-1|date=2013|publisher=Manchester University Press|location=Manchester}}</ref> used the plebiscite to disguise oppressive policies as [[populism]]. Dictators may also make use of referendums as well as [[show elections]] to further legitimize their authority such as [[António de Oliveira Salazar]] in [[1933 Portuguese constitutional referendum|1933]]; Benito Mussolini in [[1934 Italian general election|1934]]; Adolf Hitler in [[1934 German referendum|1934]], [[1936 German election and referendum|1936]]; [[Francisco Franco]] in [[1947 Spanish law of succession referendum|1947]]; [[Park Chung Hee]] in [[1972 South Korean constitutional referendum|1972]]; and [[Ferdinand Marcos]] in [[1973 Philippine constitutional plebiscite|1973]]. Hitler's use of plebiscites is argued{{by whom|date=March 2016}} as the reason why, since [[World War II]], there has been no provision in [[Germany]] for the holding of referendums at the federal level.

In recent years, referendums have been used strategically by several European governments trying to pursue political and electoral goals.<ref>{{cite journal|url=https://www.jcer.net/index.php/jcer/article/view/836/781|first1=Cecilia Emma|last1=Sottilotta|date=2017|title=The Strategic Use of Government-Sponsored Referendums in Contemporary Europe: Issues and Implications|journal=Journal of Contemporary European Research|volume=13|issue=4|pages=1361–1376|doi=10.30950/jcer.v13i4.836|s2cid=158825358|doi-access=free|access-date=2017-12-16|archive-date=2017-12-17|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171217014256/https://www.jcer.net/index.php/jcer/article/view/836/781|url-status=live}}</ref>

In 1995, [[John Bruton]] considered that {{blockquote|All governments are unpopular. Given the chance, people would vote against them in a referendum. Therefore avoid referendums. Therefore don't raise questions which require them, such as the big versus the little states.<ref>{{Cite news|url = https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/31/referendums-are-a-bad-idea-irish-leader-told-eu-in-1995|title = Referendums are a bad idea, Irish leader told EU in 1995|newspaper = The Guardian|date = 2019-12-31|last1 = Bowcott|first1 = Owen|last2 = Davies|first2 = Caroline|access-date = 2019-12-31|archive-date = 2019-12-31|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20191231110719/https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/31/referendums-are-a-bad-idea-irish-leader-told-eu-in-1995|url-status = live}}</ref>}}

===Closed questions and the separability problem===
Some critics of the referendum attack the use of closed questions. A difficulty called the [[separability problem]] can plague a referendum on two or more issues. If one issue is in fact, or in perception, related to another on the ballot, the imposed simultaneous voting of first preference on each issue can result in an outcome which is displeasing to most.

===Undue limitations on regular government power===
Several commentators have noted that the use of [[Popular initiative|citizens' initiatives]] to amend constitutions has so tied the government to a jumble of popular demands as to render the government unworkable. A 2009 article in ''[[The Economist]]'' argued that this had restricted the ability of the [[California]] state government to tax the people and pass the budget, and called for an entirely new Californian constitution.<ref>{{Cite news
 | title=California: The ungovernable state
 | magazine=[[The Economist]]
 | location=[[London]]
 | date=16–22 May 2009
 | pages=33–36
 | url=https://www.economist.com/united-states/2009/05/14/the-ungovernable-state
 | access-date=4 June 2025
 | archive-date=4 September 2009
 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090904195421/http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13649050
 | url-status=live
 }}</ref>

A similar problem also arises when elected governments accumulate excessive debts. That can severely reduce the effective margin for later governments.

Both these problems can be moderated by a combination of other measures as 
* strict rules for correct accounting on budget plans and effective public expenditure;
* mandatory assessment by an independent public institution of all budgetary implications of all legislative proposals, before they can be approved;
* mandatory prior assessment of the constitutional coherence of any proposal;
* interdiction of extra-budget expenditure (tax payers anyway have to fund them, sooner or later).

=== Disproportionate disruption ===
Referendums occur occasionally rather than periodically as elections are and they do not offer the same kind of formal opposition. Because referendums affect for a longer term than legislative deliberation, a turnout and supermajority requirement is necessary to maintain principles of majoritarianism. In republic polities, referendums could be used to bypass legislatures and representatives by the executive body. Zurcher argues that the use of the Nazi referendums was ending turnout requirements to advance intrinsic advantages in an otherwise  slower and more demanding manner to constitutional and policy changes.
<ref>{{cite journal | url=https://academic.oup.com/icon/article/21/1/187/7079631 | doi=10.1093/icon/moad013 | title=The case for supermajority requirements in referendums | date=2023 | last1=Qvortrup | first1=Matt | last2=Trueblood | first2=Leah | journal=International Journal of Constitutional Law | volume=21 | pages=187–204 | doi-access=free }}</ref>

==Sources==
* The Federal Authorities of the Swiss Confederation, statistics (German). [https://web.archive.org/web/20081210071708/http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/de/index/themen/17/03/blank/key/stimmbeteiligung.html Statistik Schweiz – Stimmbeteiligung]
* {{cite journal|last1=Turcoane|first1= Ovidiu|title=A proposed contextual evaluation of referendum quorum using fuzzy logics|journal= Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods |volume=10|issue= 2|date=2015|pages= 83–93|url=http://www.jaqm.ro/issues/volume-10,issue-2/pdfs/8_OV_.pdf}}

==See also==
* [[Right to petition]]
*[[Deliberative referendum]]

==References==
{{Reflist|30em}}

==External links==
* [https://ballotpedia.org/List_of_ballot_measures_by_year From 1777 inclusively]

==Further reading==
{{Commons category|Referendums}}
*Smith, Julie (ed.). 2021. ''[https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-55803-1 The Palgrave Handbook of European Referendums]''. Palgrave.
*{{cite journal |doi=10.1017/gov.2018.16 |title=Explaining the Paradox of Plebiscites |journal=Government and Opposition |pages=1–18 |year=2018 |last1=Qvortrup |first1=Matt |last2=O'Leary |first2=Brendan |last3=Wintrobe |first3=Ronald |volume=55 |issue=2 |s2cid=149756080}}
*{{cite journal|last1=Topaloff|first1=Liubomir|title=Elite Strategy or Populist Weapon?|journal=Journal of Democracy|date=2017|volume=28|issue=3|pages=127–140|doi=10.1353/jod.2017.0051|s2cid=157760485|url=http://www.journalofdemocracy.org/article/rise-referendums-elite-strategy-or-populist-weapon|url-access=subscription}}
* {{cite journal|last1=Qvortrup|first1=Matt|title=Demystifying Direct Democracy|journal=Journal of Democracy|date=2017|volume=28|issue=3|pages=141–152|doi=10.1353/jod.2017.0052|s2cid=157819009|url=http://www.journalofdemocracy.org/article/rise-referendums-demystifying-direct-democracy|url-access=subscription}}
* Morel, L. (2011). 'Referenda'. In: B. Badie,  D.  Berg-Schlosser,  &  L.  Morlino (eds), ''International Encyclopedia of Political Science''. Thousand Oaks: Sage: 2226–2230.  {{ISBN?}}

{{Portal bar|Politics}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Referendums| ]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Direct democracy]]
[[Category:Voting]]
[[Category:Political terminology]]
[[Category:Latin gerundives in English]]