Of, by and for the people. That's us folks! (whither US
or some other country) This is our responsibility and we need some tools to do
it. Divided Powers is a safe guard against tyranny. We have President
(Administration) Congress, Supreme Court all over seeing each other. However.
Congress is supposed to decide to go to war, and they did not even discuss the
Iraq invasion! The Court did not question Congress and certainly Bush did not.
BUT WE could have questioned Congress! The problem is we do not have the tool
to do so. We need a National Initiative and Referendum
structure for the
Nation. We also need it in ALL states if you do not have it.
It is very important that an I&R system be structured so
the people maintain all power over the I&R, that the people have power to make
law, stop poor legislation, and recall anyone with poor conduct.
Bruno Kaufman's* DIRECT DEMOCRACY FOR TRANSITION
COUNTRIES looks at the past, the present and future. This extremely well
researched paper will help you to understand the importance of taking action
now to improve our governance.
* The author is Professor of Economics at the Institute
for Empirical Economic Research, University of Zurich, and Director of CREMA
Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts. e-mail:
bsfrey@iew.unizh.ch
DIRECT DEMOCRACY FOR
TRANSITION COUNTRIES
How to do it? Well, first we need to help people
understand the benefits of Initiative and Referendum, and how this would
improve government. WE can do this by providing the links to Professor Kaufmans' papers and
other DD information. Than we need to gather "the people" for each location i.e.: local,
state, national, global who would like to implement I&R/DD. This is
networking. We need people to build sites and email lists of their local
people so we can network and accomplish a National reform.
Some say, the people may not want this. Democracy is
CHOICES and if we do not understand that we have a choice or what the choice
is, we are not democratic. We need to inform and educate people about I&R and
DD so the people can choose what they think is best.
Some suggestions below, please comment and add your
ideas. eggum@frontiernet.net
1. Start an email list, yahoo or wherever, to gather your
communities people.
2. When significant people have signed on, ask for
petition signature gatherers and see if you have the area covered.
3. Gather signatures and present the petition to the
government, in an official and accepted way so it cannot be later questioned
in court.
4. The petition should require a referendum (election) to
make whatever changes/additions in the law or constitution of the government.
Some I&R systems are simply "advisorary" and the Parliament or Legislature
does not have to accept it. This would have to be worded correctly before the
petition could begin.
5. Write letters, advertise etc. for the election.
6. Keep at it until won.
Excellent article How to
build a successful organization - the example of "Mehr Demokratie"
Than we need to look at what works and doesn't. From this
we can structure in clauses which prevent problems.
Developing I&R
Some things about government:
1. Constitutions
A Why a constitution is needed.
B. Bills of Rights, examples.
C. Power, divided, delegated.
D. How much Democracy?
E.
Scheme for EU
DD could work for US TOO!
F. Developing DD/IR This page has examples
of some things which work and some which do not.
A Why a
constitution is needed
If a nation says its government is a Democracy, it
implies that the government is: of, by, and for the people”. The question of
late is just how much are the people actually involved?
With democracy, and “majority rule” thinking, whatever is
voted in is accepted as “the peoples” choice. Thus if the people vote for a
communist party, as recently happened in Cheq land, that is their choice. If
the people choose a dictatorship or a Monarchy over a “republican” or
“parliamentarian” form of government, that is their choice. But that is the
DANGER!
If it is the case that the people do not want a
dictatorship or monarchy when forming their government, it can be written as
such in the constitution and before such could happen the constitution would
have to be changed. Dividing and delegating the power of government is an
important part of Constitutions. It is here the people can reserve their
power, demand referendums on specific matters etc. Delegating and defining
power is essential. Presently the "bureaucracies" have to much control. These
are the agencies of government such as Social Services, Land Use / Zoneing,
often they make "policy" which is enforced as law, such as the "Tax
Collectors". These "laws" should be considered for their constitutionality as
well as purpose and enforcement procedures, than the people decide their
validity. Presently these "laws" (policy) simply become law and we are obliged
to follow them.
Of course the people can make a “wrong choice,” which may
happen when passion like fear is involved. To guard against that, the
Constitution can be structured so votes which would be contrary to the
Country’s best interest would be “Un-Constitutional” and therefore not
allowed. For instance, it could be structured so a Nation could not give up
it’s sovereignty through a simple election. Or, if a “Bill of Rights”
is attached, a law or proposal could not violate those rights, as it would be
“un-constitutional”. It should be relatively easy to retract a law or policy
so errors may be corrected. They are NOT written in stone.
As you can see a constitution is a very definitive,
necessary document. There are many items necessary in a constitution.
I would like to construct a constitutional outline. This
would be a document showing many of the important items which people think are
important in a constitution. I would also like references, such as Locke,
Socrates Madison, if you are using information from these philosophers and
founders of constitutions. If this is your own idea, please attach a paper
with your hypothesis.
If you send the items you would like addressed in a
constitution, I can post them on the constitution outline web page for all to
consider.
Constitution Outline
Please send to me;
eggum@frontiernet.net
Thanks, Bruce,
B. Bills of Rights examples:
I suggest we all use the UN Human Rights.
Many countries have sanctioned it. It can be added to or changed if the people
desire but certainly is a good beginning.
USA Bill of Rights:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmenti
UN Human Rights:
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/undocs.html
Swiss Constitution:
http://www.admin.ch/ch/e/rs/1999/2556.pdf
Click PDF and it comes up in English. The Swiss
Constitution does not have a separate "Bill of Rights". These are defined in
the beginning of the Constitution.
Note also, the Swiss
Constitution is under constant revision by the people, correcting and
improving it all the time.
Power, divided,
delegated.
Generally power is divided to houses of parliament/congress, judicial,
administration (Prime Minister/President)
Now, we want some of those powers directly in the hands
of the people. We must define those powers.
Presently most constitutions cannot be changed with out a
referendum.
Other matters could also require a referendum such as
aggression. To go to war should be the peoples decision which could include
the "covert" wars of the "secret" intelligence agencies. This is different
than if attacked. The administration must make that decision as it is
immediate.
Tax matters, ecological matters, corporate licensing,
security, and other bureaucratic matter could require the peoples acceptance.
How to divide these powers will be a crucial question as
we begin to take responsibility of our government.
How Much Democracy?
It is interesting that the Cantons of Switzerland all have different
levels of "Direct Democracy". Some have quite a bit of government actions
which require referendum and others have little. However the important thing I
believe is that they HAVE THE CHOICE ! Beginning with a simple
I&R, the people can than decide the level they are comfortable with. As Bruno
states in his paper, it takes a bit of time for people to become comfortable
making decisions about their government. The people will than ask for more
authority as they think it is needed, and they think they can accomplish it.
Of course there are many areas which the people can be
more effective in "managing" their government. For instance, the retirement
program is expected to accomplish certain objectives. The people using these
services can "report" to other citizens and if the agency needs to be
"corrected a bit" and the people could demand it.
The riots of the 1960's brought the Report
of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders report. I find this
book at used book stores quite cheap. One of the findings, was that every
court, agency and government institution should have a grievance procedure.
Grievance Procedures were required by law, but now they have been swept
aside again. Grievance Procedures are the first tool for us people to have a
say and input into these many many burocratic agency's. We must make this a
requirement also. With Grievance Procedures, we can eliminate law suits,
correcting errors when they appear. We can also be assured that services due
will be provided.
The step by step process of the people having a greater
hands on experience with government should cause little problem and will have
many benefits.
Planning Cells
Another tool in solving problems is Planning Cells. They
have solved and mediated problems other methods failed.
Mailing lists:
Just now I have the Wisconsin mailing list. Please all feel free to join
and post.
WIGov@yahoogroups.com
NEW Scheme for the
EU could work for the US too!
The problem of managing huge amounts of
initiatives and deciding which should be considered needs to be addressed by
"the people." The scheme below does provide equality and significant power for
the people to manage government. A similar scheme could work for your
government.
This link takes you to some of the
problems I have posted from 2001 - 2002. Although not addressed specifically
by the following scheme, the scheme does provide a way for the EU people to
correct errors. The Corpus Juris court system takes the EU back to the days of
locking people in the "Castle" with no charge, no court, no justice. Scroll
down for specifics.
EU EC control
Dear colleagues in Direct Democracy,
Next to the posting of our colleague Paul Carline (you can read it below)
we are proud to announce you that after six months of deliberation and
research (since the Barcelona Forum held by IRI there on March 28 this year -
and during the Citizens' Assemblies, held parallel to the last European Summit
in Chalkidike, Greece, where we have given personally our Resolution to the
European leaders - up until now) we formed finally (Wednesday, Sept. 17th in
Greece) the Network called "Democratic Euro-Vision" with the aim to enforce
the following Instrument of the European Civil Societies in the Constitutional
Treaty, through the Intergovernmental Conference beginning its works on
October 4th.We will also support with all our powers the objectives of the
European Referendum Campaign
http://www.european-referendum.org/
Please comment on the following initial text and join our efforts:
EUROPEAN Civil Society's ASSEMBLY for SOCIAL MONITORING
We propose the institutional consolidation of a new alternative and Direct
democratic instrument expressing the European citizens in the context of the
completion of the European Constitutional Treaty and the prospect of a future,
fully operational, European Union (on federal principles) which will respect
further to the principle of population analogies (expressed already in the
European Parliament), also the equality among citizens of its members states
(expressed in the proposed Assembly), as this principle exist in the Senates
and all the similar Chambers of all federal States, that follow the Bicammeral
Constitutional Structure.
As an answer to the criticism expressed against the European Union, as far as
the existence of the so-called "democratic deficit" is concerned, we suggest
the manning of this new institutional instrument- temporarily called European
Assembly for Social Monitoring - with four hundred (400) members coming from
the following four categories of European Citizens:
A. A hundred members (four from each of the twenty-five members states in the
European Union) who will hail from the Local Authorities in each country and
express on a legislative level the institutional instrument of the E.U.
called "Europe of Regions".
B. A hundred members (according to the analogy mentioned above, referred also
to the 25 new Commissioners) who will come from the productive classes of
European Societies and will express also legislatively the professional
associations ( of lawyers, doctors, e.t.c.), all kinds of chambers and,
generally, all professionals in European countries.
C. A hundred members (by the same analogy-4 from each 25 States monitoring by
subject of their interests the 25 General Directions of the Commission)
who will hail from the organizations of Civil Society, from all sorts of non
governmental organizations ( NGOs) and citizens unions with specific
interests.
D. A hundred members (twenty-five from each member state again ) who will be
registered in lists consisting of conscious volunteers and determined by lot
at regular intervals. These members should be interested in contributing to
public affairs and performing the legislative task undertaken by the European
Union.
The aim of this particular instrument will be, on the one hand, the shadowy
observation, control and social inspection of the undertakings of the
instruments having executive power in the European Union ( primarily of the
Council, the Commission, the President and the Minister of Foreign Affairs in
the E.U.) and, on the other hand, the law-making of the resolutions resulting
from citizens' legislative initiatives, thus putting into use the new
constitutional prospect ( art.46 of the existing now Draft Constitutional
Treaty) concerning the obligation of the E.U. legislative instruments ( the
Council, the Commission and the Parliament mainly ) to look into every
resolution signed by a million European citizens at least, who come from a
significant number of members states. Namely, this suggested Chamber of Civil
Society could be considered as performing the duty of issuing the so-called
"Pre-resolutions" which were also drawn in the past Direct Democratic system
(by the Vouli (Parliament) of 500 in the ancient Athenian regime model) in
order to assist the Popular Assembly (Ecclesia of Demos) to its legislative
jurisdiction.
From the above-mentioned, it is obvious that the enactment of such an
instrument, as the proposed "European Assembly for Social Monitoring", will
promote the so-called "Direct Democratic Principle", since the social origin
of its members and the functional procedures suggested above and furthermore
in details confirm the potential for substantial civil expression within the
Society of Citizens, serving at the same time basic political components of an
integrated federal European superstate.
George L. Kokkas - Spokesperson of "Forum for Citizens' Democracy" and "WDDM"
I suggest this scheme could work for the United States as
the United States is also a large Federal Government. Monitoring the Congress,
Administration and Judiciary is a huge job. A "grievance procedure" was
advocated and made into law from the National Advisor Commission on Civil
Disorders in 1968. This Commission found it essential that people could alert
the agencies and courts when atrocities were preformed. The problem with
grievances is who is a fair evaluator. This body could be that institution.