ith only 80 out of 200 legislative districts facing even token competition this year, the political action in Massachusetts has shifted dramatically toward the ballot questions, where many voters see the vital connection to their lives that has been lacking in traditional politics.
Massachusetts voters are not the first to discover the ballot process as a road to meaningful change; 24 states have citizens' initiative processes, and voters in Oregon and California face three times as many questions this year.
Still, many political observers say it's no coincidence that the state's increase in ballot questions accompanies growing complaints about the state of the State House: that power is concentrated in the hands of House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran and Senate President Thomas F. Birmingham, dissent is rare, and rank-and-file lawmakers have largely sunk into the background. It's little wonder, critics say, that activists have turned to the same outlet.
When people look at Beacon Hill, ''I think they see three people making the vast majority of the decisions,'' said Warren Tolman, a former state senator and Democratic gubernatorial candidate. ''If they're not one of those three people and they have an issue that deserves attention ... they go outside the system.''
And where local elections once forced a hearty discussion of the issues, most voters now lack that forum, too, said Lou DiNatale, director of the UMass Poll. That's why this year's ballot is filled, he said, with ''very popular ideas that haven't seemed to have gotten to the Legislature.''
Indeed, in a year when voters face what could be the fewest legislative races ever, they are also confronting the second-highest number of initiative petitions in state history. Voters, not lawmakers, will decide policy matters that range from taxes to animal rights to health care to drug interdiction.
Legislators, however, reject the criticism that they're not addressing the most important issues and say the lack of competition against incumbents shows widespread contentment with decisions made on Beacon Hill.
Finneran makes the case for progress in a radio ad campaign he launched last month, which trumpets the achievements of House members in lowering taxes, seeking to reform education, and protecting open space.
''The turnaround in Massachusetts did not happen by itself. The men and women you elected to represent you had to make tough decisions to get our state back on track,'' Finneran says in the 60-second spots, which he paid for through his campaign committee.
Representative Shaun Kelly of Dalton, a five-term Republican and one of the few to face a credible challenger, says the popular notion that lawmakers march in lockstep with leadership is unfair.
''I don't buy into that,'' Kelly said. ''We all have a tremendous ability to stop legislation or at least have a public debate on things. You have to have the courage of your convictions to try and buck the system.''
Still, the lack of contested races is striking to many around the state and the nation. According to the national public-interest group Common Cause, Massachusetts ranked 49th among the states in the number of contested legislative primaries in 1998, and could rank last this year.
The loudest discussions this fall have taken place on the sidewalk in front of the State House, the site of news conferences and rallies for activists on both sides of the ballot questions. Inside the building, critics complain, it's a much quieter scene.
''It's basically inert for much of the year, except for these brief flurries of activity around things like the budget or the Red Sox,'' said Ken White, executive director of Common Cause of Massachusetts.
Tolman said that of 7,500 bills filed every session, only 300 to 400 will reach the governor's desk. And Richard Hogarty, a political science professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts-Boston, says too many measures are passed in the form of ''outside sections'' to appropriations bills, which allow proposals to become law without a legislative hearing process.
''I think the general public is catching on to some of the duplicity of the Legislature, and they're mad at the Legislature, or at least alienated,'' Hogarty said. ''So they take out their alienation by saying, `Well if they won't do it ... we'll gather enough signatures and put it on the ballot and do it ourselves.''
Some issue advocates have found even the threat of a ballot question to be useful: a way to prod lawmakers into taking action. Take the case of Health Care for All, a group that is fighting the universal health care propoal in Question 5, on the grounds that it would supersede a newly minted patients' bill of rights. The group originally helped to put the universal health care measure on the ballot, to force the Legislature to act.
''Would the law have come out without this? It looks like it probably wouldn't have,'' said Becky Derby, spokeswoman for Health Care For All.
A recently passed law restricting the use of pesticides originated with the threat of a ballot question, says state Representative James Marzilli, an Arlington Democrat. And Question 6, the proposed tax credit on Massachusetts Turnpike tolls and the auto excise tax, originated as a proposed bill in 1997, said Harold Hubschman, a chief supporter of the measures.
Hubschman doesn't blame the power structure alone for the failure of the toll tax bill - which he says restores fairness to the road financing system, but critics call a poor way to make tax and road maintenance policy. At heart, Hubschman contends, it was a money problem, with ''no possibility of the voters being heard over the din of ... money in the State House. This is the only way that we could do it.''
But many warn that money poses just as large a threat of corrupting the ballot question process. Already, ballot questions are a money-making venture for political consultants and signature-gathering companies, said John Berg, a political science professor at Suffolk University. Massachusetts has seen an increased number of ballot questions in part, he said, because ''the professional lobbying interest group community has discovered how to do them.''
And some of the Legislature's sharpest critics are also wary of ballot questions. White says it's easy to corrupt with deep pockets and special interests. Hogarty says he thinks it reduces complex policy issues to yes-and-no questions.
But DiNatale of the UMass Poll is not among the doomsayers. If voters have a more direct say on the issues, he says, more of them might come out to vote.
''I think it'll end up generating bigger turnout, which really gets to the heart of the problem of the representative system,'' he said.
Increased turnout would surely have an effect on Massachusetts' flagging legislative races. The already low interest in legislative seats has been dropping, White says. In 1998, 86 percent of state legislative primaries went uncontested, and this year, 92 percent of lawmakers faced no primary challenge.
That's one of the reasons Andrew Baker, Kelly's Democratic opponent in the 2d Berkshire District, is running in the first place. Kelly had no opponent in 1998, and defeated his last Democratic challenger by a 2 to 1 ratio in 1996.
While Baker, a business association director, disagrees with Kelly on issues such as the death penalty, tax cuts, and health insurance, he also thinks lawmakers have ceded too much power to the leadership.
''It makes these legislators not only less accountable to their constituencies, but less relevant to the legislative process,'' Baker said.
In the last few months, Baker has raised nearly $20,000, attended fairs and chicken barbecues, knocked on doors, sent out direct mail, and participated in three debates.
''That was my goal,'' he says. ''To buck the trend and give the voters a real choice. I hope to win, but even if I don't, I hope I've advanced the process.''
