California Proposition 4 (1911)

Last updated

Proposition 4 of 1911 (or Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 8) was an amendment of the Constitution of California that granted women the right to vote in the state for the first time. Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 8 was sponsored by Republican State Senator Charles W. Bell from Pasadena, California. [1] It was adopted by the California State Legislature and approved by voters in a referendum held as part of a special election on October 10, 1911.

Constitution of California primary organizing law for the U.S. state of California

The Constitution of California is the primary organizing law for the U.S. state of California, describing the duties, powers, structures and functions of the government of California. Following cession of the area from Mexico to the United States in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo that ended the Mexican–American War, California's original constitution was drafted in both English and Spanish by delegates elected on August 1, 1849, to represent all communities home to non-indigenous citizens. The delegates wrote and adopted the constitution at the 1849 Constitutional Convention, held beginning on September 3 in Monterey, and voters approved the new constitution on November 13, 1849. Adoption of the "state" constitution actually preceded California's Admission to the Union on September 9, 1850 by almost ten months.

Charles W. Bell American politician

Charles Webster Bell was a U.S. Representative from California.

Pasadena, California City in California, United States

Pasadena is a city in Los Angeles County, California, United States, located 10 miles northeast of Downtown Los Angeles.

Contents

An earlier attempt to enfranchise women had been rejected by California voters in 1896, [2] but in 1911 California became the sixth U.S. state to adopt the reform. [3] Nine years later in 1920, women's suffrage was constitutionally recognized at the federal level by the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This amendment prohibited both the federal government and all of the states from denying women the right to vote.

California State of the United States of America

California is a state in the Pacific Region of the United States. With 39.6 million residents, California is the most populous U.S. state and the third-largest by area. The state capital is Sacramento. The Greater Los Angeles Area and the San Francisco Bay Area are the nation's second and fifth most populous urban regions, with 18.7 million and 8.8 million residents respectively. Los Angeles is California's most populous city, and the country's second most populous, after New York City. California also has the nation's most populous county, Los Angeles County, and its largest county by area, San Bernardino County. The City and County of San Francisco is both the country's second-most densely populated major city after New York City and the fifth-most densely populated county, behind only four of the five New York City boroughs.

U.S. state constituent political entity of the United States

In the United States, a state is a constituent political entity, of which there are currently 50. Bound together in a political union, each state holds governmental jurisdiction over a separate and defined geographic territory and shares its sovereignty with the federal government. Due to this shared sovereignty, Americans are citizens both of the federal republic and of the state in which they reside. State citizenship and residency are flexible, and no government approval is required to move between states, except for persons restricted by certain types of court orders. Four states use the term commonwealth rather than state in their full official names.

Womens suffrage the legal right of women to vote

Women's suffrage is the right of women to vote in elections; a person who advocates the extension of suffrage, particularly to women, is called a suffragist. Limited voting rights were gained by women in Tuscany, Finland, Iceland, Sweden and some Australian colonies and western U.S. states in the late 19th century. National and international organizations formed to coordinate efforts to gain voting rights, especially the International Woman Suffrage Alliance, and also worked for equal civil rights for women.

Proposition 4 Election

Proposition 4 was narrowly approved by California voters with 50.7 percent support. [4] Election evening results appeared to indicate that Proposition 4 would be defeated as there was strong opposition from the San Francisco Bay Area. [5] However, late returns from the agricultural and rural parts of the state overcame majority opposition from Bay Area cities such as San Francisco and Oakland. [6]

The county with the highest level of support for Proposition 4 was the rural Modoc County (70.5% support). The county with the lowest level of support for Proposition 4 was San Francisco County (38.1% support). Other notable counties voting against giving women the right to vote included Marin County (41.6% support), San Mateo County (44.5% support), and Alameda County (45.4% support). [7]

The ballot argument in favor of Proposition 4 was written by Republican State Senator C.W. Bell from southern California and by Republican Assemblyman H.G. Cattell, also from southern California. The ballot argument against Proposition 4 was written by Democratic State Senator J.B. Sanford from northern California. [8]

Controversial Editorials and Opinion Pieces Against Women’s Suffrage

In 1911, there were several controversial editorials and opinion pieces published by the Los Angeles Times against women’s suffrage, including Proposition 4.

<i>Los Angeles Times</i> Daily newspaper published in Los Angeles, California

The Los Angeles Times is a daily newspaper which has been published in Los Angeles, California, since 1881. It has the fourth-largest circulation among United States newspapers, and is the largest U.S. newspaper not headquartered on the East Coast. The paper is known for its coverage of issues particularly salient to the U.S. West Coast, such as immigration trends and natural disasters. It has won more than 40 Pulitzer Prizes for its coverage of these and other issues. As of June 18, 2018, ownership of the paper is controlled by Patrick Soon-Shiong, and the executive editor is Norman Pearlstine.

A Los Angeles Times editorial dated January 21, 1911, stated that “women are incapable of physically dominating men. By their inferior physical strength they are unable to compete on an equal basis in any line of endeavor where ability is determined by sheer bodily prowess. All positions of physical power - such as in our police forces, our armies and our navies - will necessarily be filled by men. In other words the enforcement of all law must inevitably rest with men. No law or ordinance could be effectually upheld except through the willingness of men to uphold it. And no matter what words were written on the statute books of any State, if the physical power (which is the masculine power) behind it were withdrawn, the law would immediately become void and impotent. Therefore in equal suffrage we have the spectacle of women desiring to pass laws which they are physically incapable of upholding, and laws which they admit the men do not want.” [9]

A Los Angeles Times editorial dated August 19, 1911, stated that: “Possession of the ballot will not help woman, socially or industrially. It will make exactions upon her time and strength. It will invade the home and destroy its charm. It will not result in wiser laws or better government.” [10]

A Los Angeles Times editorial dated September 22, 1911, stated that: “The working man - whether he be a Republican, a Democrat or a Socialist - who walks along Broadway or Spring Street on Saturday afternoon and sees thousands of fashionably-attired girls and women of mature age parading in autos and making woman-suffrage speeches says to himself, ‘Are these butterflies to be entrusted with the task of making laws for me?’” The editorial also stated that “[t]he Times opposes woman suffrage because it does not believe in either the justice or the expediency of burdening the women of California with the duty of voting.” [11]

In a Los Angeles Times opinion piece dated October 1, 1911, Democratic State Senator J.B. Sanford, who was Chairman of the Democratic Caucus of California at the time, [12] called women’s suffrage a “disease,” a “political hysteria,” a “cruel and intolerable burden,” and a “backward step in the progress of civilization.” [13] In the same opinion piece published by the Los Angeles Times, Democratic State Senator Sanford also used homophobic language in writing the following about certain classes of people who advocate women’s suffrage: “It is the mannish female politician and the little effeminate, sissy man, and the woman who is dissatisfied with her lot and sorry that she was born a woman.” [14]

1896 Rejection of Women’s Suffrage by California Voters

During the November 3, 1896 General Election, California voters rejected Constitutional Amendment No. 6 which would have given women the right to vote. The suffrage amendment was defeated by a double-digit margin with 44.6 percent support. [15] Notable counties voting against giving women the right to vote included San Francisco County (26.1% support), San Mateo County (29.9% support), Marin County (30.8% support), Contra Costa County (37.7% support), Sacramento County (40.0% support), Sonoma County (40.4% support), Alameda County (40.7% support), and Santa Clara County (49.0% support). [16]

Both the Los Angeles Times and the San Francisco Chronicle opposed Constitutional Amendment No. 6 which would have given women the right to vote. [17] [18]

Progressive Era of Reforms

Women's suffrage was a part of the Progressive Era of reforms. On the same election day that Proposition 4 was approved, voters enacted the modern system of direct democracy in California, by approving Proposition 7, which introduced the initiative and the optional referendum powers, and Proposition 8, which introduced the recall of public officials.

Constitutional Suffrage Reforms Excluded

While Proposition 4 gave women the right to vote in California, the proposition did not alter the existing discriminatory provisions in the California Constitution limiting the right to vote, including prohibiting natives of China from voting, prohibiting idiots from voting, and prohibiting persons from voting who are unable to read the constitution in the English language and write their name. [19]

See also

Related Research Articles

League of Women Voters Non-profit, non-partisan advocacy group

The League of Women Voters (LWV) is an American civic organization that was formed to help women take a larger role in public affairs after they won the right to vote. It was founded in 1920 to support the new women suffrage rights and was a merger of National Council of Women Voters, founded by Emma Smith DeVoe, and National American Woman Suffrage Association, led by Carrie Chapman Catt, approximately six months before the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution gave women the right to vote. The League of Women Voters began as a "mighty political experiment" aimed to help newly enfranchised women exercise their responsibilities as voters. Originally, only women could join the league; but in 1973 the charter was modified to include men. LWV operates at the local, state, and national level, with over 1,000 local and 50 state leagues, and one territory league in the U.S. Virgin Islands.

2000 California Proposition 22

Proposition 22 was a law enacted by California voters in March 2000 to prevent marriage between same-sex couples. In May 2008, it was struck down by the California Supreme Court as contrary to the state constitution.

1996 California Proposition 209

Proposition 209 is a California ballot proposition which, upon approval in November 1996, amended the state constitution to prohibit state governmental institutions from considering race, sex, or ethnicity, specifically in the areas of public employment, public contracting, and public education. Modeled on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the California Civil Rights Initiative was authored by two California academics, Glynn Custred and Tom Wood. It was the first electoral test of affirmative action policies in America.

Same-sex marriage is legal in the U.S. state of California, and first became so on June 16, 2008, when the state began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples as the result of the Supreme Court of California ruling in In re Marriage Cases, which found that barring same-sex couples from marriage violated the state's Constitution. The issuance of those licenses was halted during the period of November 5, 2008 through June 27, 2013 due to the passage of Proposition 8—a state constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriages. The granting of same-sex marriages recommenced following the United States Supreme Court decision in Hollingsworth v. Perry, which restored the effect of a federal district court ruling that overturned Proposition 8 as unconstitutional.

1964 California Proposition 14

California Proposition 14 was a November 1964 ballot proposition that amended the California state constitution, nullifying the Rumford Fair Housing Act. Proposition 14 was declared unconstitutional by the California Supreme Court in 1966. The decision of the California Supreme Court was affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1967 in Reitman v. Mulkey.

Clara Shortridge Foltz United States womens rights activist

Clara Shortridge Foltz was the first female lawyer on the West Coast, and pioneered the idea of the public defender. The Criminal Courts Building in downtown Los Angeles was renamed after her in 2002, and is now known as the Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center.

The right of foreigners to vote in the United States has historically been a contentious issue. A foreigner, in this context, is an alien or a person who is not a citizen of the United States.

2008 California Proposition 4

Proposition 4, or the Abortion Waiting Period and Parental Notification Initiative, also known to its supporters as Sarah's Law, was an initiative state constitutional amendment on the 2008 California General Election ballot

2008 California Proposition 8 ballot proposition and state constitutional amendment passed in November 2008

Proposition 8, known informally as Prop 8, was a California ballot proposition and a state constitutional amendment passed in the November 2008 California state elections. The proposition was created by opponents of same-sex marriage in advance of the California Supreme Court's May 2008 appeal ruling, In re Marriage Cases, which followed the short-lived 2004 same-sex weddings controversy and found the previous ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. Proposition 8 was ultimately ruled unconstitutional by a federal court in 2010, although the court decision did not go into effect until June 26, 2013, following the conclusion of proponents' appeals.

2008 Arizona Proposition 102

Arizona Proposition 102 was an amendment to the constitution of the state of Arizona adopted by a ballot measure held in 2008. It added Article 30 of the Arizona Constitution, which says: "Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state." The amendment added a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage to existing statutory bans in place since 1996. In October 2014, Article 30 of the Arizona Constitution was struck down as unconstitutional in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, and is no longer enforced by the state of Arizona, which now allows and recognizes same-sex marriages.

Strauss v. Horton 46 Cal.4th 364, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591, 207 P.3d 48, was the consolidation of three lawsuits following the passage of California's Proposition 8 on November 4, 2008, which went into effect on November 5. The suits were filed by a number of gay couples and governmental entities. Three of these six were accepted by the Supreme Court of California to be heard together. The oral arguments were made in San Francisco on March 5, 2009. These cases were new to the California Supreme Court, and Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar stated that it will set precedent as "no previous case had presented the question of whether an initiative could be used to take away fundamental rights".

Hollingsworth v. Perry were a series of United States federal court cases that legalized same-sex marriage in the State of California. The case began in 2009 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, which found that banning same-sex marriage violates equal protection under the law. This decision overturned ballot initiative Proposition 8, which had banned same-sex marriage. After the State of California refused to defend Proposition 8, the official sponsors of Proposition 8 intervened and appealed to the Supreme Court. The case was litigated during the governorships of both Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jerry Brown, and was thus known as Perry v. Schwarzenegger and Perry v. Brown, respectively. As Hollingsworth v. Perry, it eventually reached the United States Supreme Court, which held that, in line with prior precedent, the official sponsors of a ballot initiative measure did not have Article III standing to appeal an adverse federal court ruling when the state refused to do so.

1911 California Proposition 7

Proposition 7 of 1911 was an amendment of the Constitution of California that introduced, for the first time, the initiative and the optional referendum. Prior to 1911 the only form of direct democracy in California was the compulsory referendum.

2010 California Proposition 14

Proposition 14 is a California ballot proposition that appeared on the ballot during the June 2010 state elections. It was a constitutional amendment that effectively transformed California's non-Presidential elections from first-past-the-post to a nonpartisan blanket primary. The proposition was legislatively referred to voters by the State Legislature and approved by 54% of the voters.

California Constitutional Conventions constitutional conventions that took place in California

The California Constitutional Conventions were two separate constitutional conventions that took place in California during the nineteenth century which led to the creation of the modern Constitution of California. The first, known as the Monterey Convention, held in September and October 1849 in advance of California attaining U.S. statehood the following year, adopted the state's original constitution. This document maintains jurisdiction along with the current constitution which was ratified on May 7, 1879, following the Sacramento Convention. Article 3 Section 2 of the current Constitution references the original boundaries as stated in the 1849 Constitution at Article 7. The result of Progressive mistrust of elected officials, this later constitution took a full year to finalize and is today the third longest in the world, and has been described as "the perfect example of what a constitution ought not to be". Multiple calls for a third state constitutional convention have been raised during the past quarter-century, but none has thus far gained widespread political momentum.

Ellen Clark Sargent American womens suffrage activist

Ellen Clark Sargent was an active American women's suffragette. She was influential in advocacy for the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which sought to give women the right to vote.

This is a timeline of women's suffrage in the United States.

Women's suffrage in states of the United States refers to women's right to vote in individual states of that country. Suffrage was established on a full or partial basis by various towns, counties, states and territories during the latter decades of the 19th century and early part of the 20th century. As women received the right to vote in some places, they began running for public office and gaining positions as school board members, county clerks, state legislators, judges, and, in the case of Jeannette Rankin, as a Member of Congress.

2016 California Proposition 59

California Proposition 59 is a non-binding advisory question that appeared on the 2016 California November general election ballot. It asked voters if they wanted California to work towards overturning the Citizens United U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

Sarah Knox-Goodrich

Sarah L. Knox-Goodrich (1825–1903) was a women's rights activist who worked for women's suffrage in California in the late nineteenth century. Her first husband, William Knox, was a business man, banker, and state politician. Her second husband, Levi Goodrich, was an architect in Southern California. Knox-Goodrich used her wealth and her social position to push for equal employment, school suffrage, and voting rights.

References

  1. California Legislature, Final Calendar of Legislative Business, Thirty-Ninth Session (1911), p. 300.
  2. 200 Significant Statutes and Constitutional Amendments of the 20th Century
  3. California Women's Suffrage Campaign of 1911
  4. California Secretary of State, Statement of Vote October 10, 1911, p. 4.
  5. "Suffrage May Lose – Amendment Seems Defeated". Los Angeles Times. October 11, 1911. p. I1.
  6. "Women Win in California". Washington Post. October 13, 1911. p. 1.
  7. California Secretary of State, Statement of Vote October 10, 1911, p. 4.
  8. California Secretary of State, Proposed Amendments to the Constitution of the State of California, with Legislative Reasons for and against Adoption Thereof, October 10, 1911 Special Election.
  9. "Women-Made Laws". Los Angeles Times. January 21, 1911. p. II4.
  10. "No More Burdens for Women". Los Angeles Times. August 19, 1911. p. II4.
  11. "'The Times' and Suffrage". Los Angeles Times. September 22, 1911. p. II4.
  12. Waymire, Jessica (April 8, 2011). "History of women's suffrage". Tri-City Voice.
  13. Sanford, J.B. (October 1, 1911). "Woman Suffrage Means Disruption of the Home". Los Angeles Times. p. V19.
  14. Sanford, J.B. (October 1, 1911). "Woman Suffrage Means Disruption of the Home". Los Angeles Times. p. V19.
  15. California Secretary of State, Statement of Vote November 3, 1896, p. 15.
  16. California Secretary of State, Statement of Vote November 3, 1896, p. 15.
  17. "The Constitutional Amendments". Los Angeles Times. October 31, 1896. p. 6.
  18. "This Ticket the Best One to Vote". San Francisco Chronicle. November 3, 1896. p. 16.
  19. California Secretary of State, Proposed Amendments to the Constitution of the State of California, with Legislative Reasons for and against Adoption Thereof, October 10, 1911 Special Election.