Approximately 523,521 Californians signed a petition, presented Thursday, to put legalization of marijuana to a referendum vote in November.

Props, California. Good job.

Not necessarily because you, as a state, could legalize marijuana for its medicinal purposes, for the benefits of taxation or regulation, or to try to reduce drug-related violence that spills over our border with Mexico.

No, California, you deserve praise for having a truly democratic government that can, despite glaring deficits, adequately respond to its citizens.

The California residents who signed the petition saw problems and collectively suggested a solution. To counter their state’s perennial problems with massive debt, they suggested legalizing, regulating and taxing marijuana. It’s an idea worth running with.

In Alabama, even if 523,521 people proposed an idea to fix a problem, their voices, signatures and ideas would still take a backseat to the 150 representatives and senators in Montgomery.

Why? The referendum process California uses — the system that has produced some of the most progressive legislative ideas in recent history, like Proposition 8 to codify same-sex marriage — isn’t available in Alabama.

In fact, only 24 states in the nation, with only Arkansas and Kentucky from the South, offer the process called “popular referendum.” Each of these states gives each one of its citizens the opportunity and power to produce an idea, garner support for it with a petition, and possibly see it become law.

As the most pure form of democracy, popular referendum needs to be available to every state. Let the people govern the people. If the people want to legalize marijuana to address deficit issues, let them collect an appropriate number of signatures, then put it to a vote and validate it. If the people want to trash their outdated constitution, let them do the same. Even if the people want to opt out of federal stimulus funds, take the decision away from state politicians and put a popular referendum to use.

A higher degree of the prevalence of popular referendums could only benefit the country. More progressive legislation could become law in a more efficient manner. Popular referendums would strengthen states’ rights, an increasingly important concept with today’s increased—but not malign—growth of the federal government.

Why doesn’t Alabama allow popular referendums? Easy. The entrenched special interests in Montgomery could too easily lose their power if Alabama’s citizens could directly vote to, say, mandate a rewriting of Alabama’s tax codes. If the lawmakers they’ve bought off lose a little bit of their authority over the people, the special interests’ investments would suddenly seem misplaced. That’s power they don’t want to lose.

Another kind of referendum — one we’ve seen in Alabama before — can solve this. A legislative referendum, like the proposition several years ago on Amendment One, mandating a rewrite of the 1901 Constitution could create the environment in which popular referendums could flourish. With a new, freeing constitution, we could finally make 500,000 residents’ voices louder than 150 legislators’ voices.

So, let’s follow California’s example—not by legalizing marijuana, per se, but by making it at least a possibility. It’s the democratic thing to do.

William J. Tucker is a freshman majoring in international relations. His column runs on Fridays.