Lawmaking is serious business that is best left to people whom voters elect to consider all viewpoints. The trouble is that the voice of the voters isn't always heard. That might be because the voice of special interests often speaks more loudly.

Voters then should hold elected officials' feet to the fire when it comes to delivering the things they feel are important.

The frustration over the legislative process is evident in some of the proposed changes to the city charter, which is designed to deal with governmental roles and functions.

Some of the proposed amendments, including one that would reserve 1 percent of property taxes for land conservation and affordable housing, are easy to love. Meeting these needs is government's compelling duty.

However, making such changes through amendments mimics the voter initiative process. Thus far, 24 states have some sort of voter initiative process with results that have been mixed at best.

One problem with taking legislative matters directly to the voters — either through voter initiative or by legislating through amendments — is that these proposals are sometimes worded unclearly and may have unintended consequences.

A decade ago, many California voters were surprised when the state's Proposition 209 — misleadingly titled the "Civil Rights Initiative" — effectively banned affirmative action in public employment, public education or public contracting.

Another downside to the initiative process is that reversing or even amending initiatives is difficult. And the cost of getting an initiative on the ballot falls within reach of well-moneyed special interests, rather than the average voter.

Hawai'i state law does not enable voter-initiative measures. And attempting to improvise a kind of voter initiative through a charter amendment is an equally bad bargain, in the long run. If the new language in these documents proves to be a problem, the process of changing it takes at least two years, and must once again be brought before voters.

It's unfortunate that voters feel driven to conduct an end-run through these amendments. Sadly, this is a dismal reflection of ineffective elected leaders. And it's our fault for accepting the status quo when we step into the voting booth and re-elect them.