California elections are afflicted with a peculiar electoral device called "the ballot proposition" or "ballot initiative." These are proposals for specific laws or the repeal of laws upon which the legislature will not act, so the proposals are taken directly to the people.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, when the California legislature was corrupt and dominated by the powerful railroad interests, the idea of people being able to vote on reforms directly was a tremendous contribution to democracy. In the last two decades, however, the initiative process has become big business, with millions being spent by special interests to put their causes on the ballot with advertising campaigns that are mostly illusion and have very little substance.

In 1996, the insurance companies qualified an initiative for the ballot called "Proposition 205." Proposition 205 was a proposal to prohibit uninsured motorists who were injured in traffic accidents from suing for the damages they suffered.

We talked it over in my law firm. We decided that it would be a bad thing if the proposition passed. It would block access to the courts for poor people who had real injuries and no other remedy. It would deny them the legal representation they needed to see that they recover for the damages to their vehicles, health, and loss of the ability to work even when it wasn’t their fault. Also, it would not be in the interest of lawyers, who would lose work and income from suits barred under the law.

I came home and told my wife, Patricia, that it would be bad for motorists with little money and for the legal business if Proposition 205 passed. She disagreed. She said that uninsured motorists cause damage to insured drivers whose own insurers have to pay off. This drives up insurance rates to a point that even more people can’t afford insurance, increasing costs for everyone. She asked, "Where is the justice in people obeying the law and sacrificing to buy insurance only to be wrecked by someone who doesn’t care enough to drive with the financial protections that the law requires?"

I disputed her point. I thought no one should be denied access to the due process of the courts no matter how irresponsible they might be. It’s a matter for the judicial system to determine the rights and remedies of supplicants and whether their carelessness should be taken into account.

The issue posed by the Proposition was an important one. In the weeks before the election I prayed about Proposition 205. The Holy Spirit began to work on my heart. The law that requires insurance protects everyone on the road. If you can’t pay your employees, you shouldn’t be in business. By the same rationale, if you can’t afford insurance, you shouldn’t drive. Many more people are hurt than just the uninsured driver if he or she is in an accident. Besides, the loss of legal fees was the major reason for my voting against the law. This was selfish. I came under deep conviction to vote "yes."

The day of the election, Patricia and I walked to the polling place. After we marked our ballots and we were walking home, we began to talk about our votes. "I voted for 205," I told her.

"You did? Why?"

"I prayed about it and the Lord put it in my heart that I was being selfish to vote against it, that the law should be obeyed even if it costs legal fees."

Patricia said, "I prayed about it, too. I was impressed to vote against it."

"Why?"

"People have to get to work just to make ends meet, insurance or no insurance. The Holy Spirit let me know that my heart was too hard. It isn’t right to make it harder on the poor."

"What do you think about the Holy Spirit impressing us to take different positions on the same issue?" I asked her.

"I don’t think how we voted was the point. I think God was dealing with your selfishness and my callousness. God used this to change both of our hearts to his honor, not ours."

"You’re right," I said.

We walked home together hand in hand.

The grace to be found in our lives is not found in what we do. The grace is found in the reason we do it. To the submitted Christian, this may mean we exist in the realm of "whatever," as in "Whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him" (Col. 3:17). And, "So whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do everything for the glory of God" (1 Cor. 10:31).

Patricia and I prayed that our electoral expectations be clarified. Instead, God purified us. The grace that we received and the unity we achieved came in the presence of the God we both trusted rather than our knowledge of the plan he had for each of us.

EMAIL THIS ARTICLE