The “progressive” founders of Oklahoma injected direct democracy into the state Constitution. Today, Oklahoma is one of 24 states with some form of plebiscitary lawmaking. Thankfully, the Oklahoma Legislature has passed SB 1027 to enhance safeguards and increase transparency around this fundamentally dubious practice.

Until the Progressive Era, most Americans understood the dangers of direct democracy. While the “just powers” of government derive from the consent of the governed, such powers may nevertheless be abused. A majority may consent to use these powers to violate or obscure the great truth that “all men are created equal … with certain unalienable Rights.” This is the preeminent reason (there are others) why the American Founders opposed direct democracy.

Instead, the Founders gave us a republic—if we can keep it.

“A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place,” is less dangerous than direct democracy, according to James Madison (writing as Publius in Federalist No. 10). He and Hamilton, in The Federalist and elsewhere, make the argument for our compound republic—a nation of states, all governed as republics.

Even the states? Especially the states, according to the U.S. Constitution:

“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion.”

Is lawmaking in a republic perfect? Of course not. But at least human frailties are filtered through a more deliberative, more correctable process than a single public vote. Legislators take multiple recorded votes on each piece of legislation, usually after public debate. And these legislators are drawn from the people and elected by us. Ultimately, they do reflect the people, in our wisdom, in our corruption—and we have regular opportunities to fire them.

Direct democracy is little more than mob rule dressed up with process. Sometimes we like what the mob does. It’s easy to fool ourselves: Surely the mob will see things my way!

In the wake of voting for the dumbest “medical” marijuana law in the nation, Oklahomans ought to be more discerning. (This author has no problem with truly medicinal marijuana.) Perhaps someday soon, Oklahomans will realize that adding Obamacare’s welfare expansion into our state Constitution was not a great idea.

SB 1027, sponsored by state Sen. David Bullard and House Speaker Kyle Hilbert, requires some geographic balance in signature gathering to put measures before voters. It also regulates who gathers those signatures and requires transparency around who pays them. And it requires an explanation “in basic words, which can be easily found in dictionaries of general usage, [of] the effect of the proposition,” including what it will cost. All this is common sense and good government, and a small step towards reviving a republican form of government.