Some worry that voters would support extreme policies, but the historical record gives reason for cautious optimism. In the last two decades, Colorado, Mississippi and South Dakota — all deep red states — rejected by large margins ballot measures that would have banned abortion in almost all circumstances, and there is no recent example of voters approving an extremely restrictive policy. The Kansas vote is a case in point: It’s a red state but voters rejected the idea of moving toward a complete ban on abortion — they want to keep the current middle ground policy that allows abortion in the early stages and restricts it later on. There is also no example of voters approving an extremely permissive policy either, although California will be a test case in November; citizens will vote on a legislative proposition that appears to allow abortions without any restrictions related to viability, going further in the permissive direction than any Western nation. Europe’s record with national referendums also points to adoption of centrist policies when voters are involved.

Another advantage of referendums is that they can bring about more durable solutions. A loss in the legislature leads the losers to redouble their efforts to take control, while a referendum loss can only be undone by persuading the voters to change their minds. A comparison between the United States, which legalized abortion by judicial fiat in 1973, and Italy, which did it by referendum in 1981, is illuminating: Abortion never became the contentious policy in Italy that it became in the United States. Although the political temperature rises during the course of a campaign, citizens seem more willing to accept the legitimacy of a decision made by their fellow citizens than one made by political elites.