Hi Annette and Martin,
Thanks for the email
The article was very interesting.
The lack of funding of the referendum system by the government
is something that can be addressed by the Swiss. They have the tool of DD to do
it.
I have just come back from Switzerland. I spoke to many of the population
as possible. They all have their moans about the system. I asked them all the
same question at the end:
“Would you change your system for any other in the
world”. The relpies varied from a simple “No” to “Are
you mad?”
It seems that we are the “Mad” ones for accepting
the current system of democracy which I really a form of dictatorship.
The politicians are the employees of the voters. We decide who
gets employed and we pay them.
We keep going
Regards
Jim Powell
From: Annette and Martin
[ajackson123(at)bigpond.com]
Sent: 12 Jun 2008 04:03 AM
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Subject: Re: [WDDM] DBTP Latest Posting
Jim,
you may find this study interesting,
-----
Original Message -----
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Sent: Wednesday, June 11,
2008 10:48 PM
Subject: RE: [WDDM] DBTP
Latest Posting
From: Democracy By The People
[democracybythepeople(at)gmail.com]
Sent: 10 Jun 2008 06:11 PM
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Subject: [WDDM] DBTP Latest Posting
Hi All,
I would like to be able to
access details on direct democracy as practiced around the world.
Could we have a simple matrix
similar to an Excel file with the following headings
1.
Country, province,
municipality or other geographical area
2.
Referendum (number
of times used in last 12 months and % required)
3.
Initiative (number
of times used in last 12 months and % required)
4.
Recall (number of
times used in last 12 months and % required)
5.
Email address
6.
Telephone number
7.
Population
8.
Rating
I am sure there will be more
headings to come
The ratings system will be laid
by our members
Regards
Jim Powell
Greetings all,
Submitted for contemplation and/or comment...
The following is yet another example
of people seeking more effective ways to make their voices heard within their
state government, but we also must consider the various contrary arguments
cited here that are directed against these efforts . From fear of corporate
manipulation to concerns about what laws would be passed were the public given
the chance to decide, there are plenty of objections to altering the state's
constitution in favor of referendum and initiative, which would give voters
more direct control over state government and legislation.
Nevertheless, there is no
argument that can negate the fact that every additional element of direct
democracy added to the process makes it more of a 'democracy by the people'
than before. The article illustrates that, whether they are conservative
citizens who wish to use direct democracy in an attempt to block gay marriage
or progressive citizens who seek more equitable and sustainable ways to manage
their own communities, most people would prefer to have a direct vote on
legislation that affects them, rather than leaving it to their elected
representatives to decide issues and policy on their behalf.
It has been said by critics
that direct democracy would mean 'mob rule.' Although this statement sounds
like it should be saying something powerful, I for one have never seen the
logic in it. Direct democracy is not 'mob rule,' rather it is majority rule,
and as such it is true to the concept of democracy. How does the majority
become 'a mob' in the minds of those who put forth that argument, and why do
they prefer rule by an elite group of representatives who traditionally have
proved to be poor guardians of their interests, security, and well-being? The
votes of the majority of the people on any given issue in a democracy logically
represent the collective will of the people on that issue, and should determine
policy for the collective group.
As far as fears that this
would lead to discrimination against those in the minority are concerned, where
direct democracy has been or is currently being practiced, this assertion has
not proven to be accurate. To cite a recent example, a referendum just put
forth in Switzerland by the ultra-right wing Swiss People's Party in an attempt
to restrict immigration in a discriminatory fashion was soundly defeated by the
Swiss electorate. The party, which had been gaining popularity, now finds
itself in a fight for it's political future. This is but one example of the
will of the majority providing the kind of checks and balances that have been
lost to corruption in our representative system.
So, after considering the
arguments against initiative and referendum in the following article, they are
not convincing in light of the benefits that direct democracy would provide.
Holding leaders accountable to the people rather than corporate interests,
determining the distribution of local resources locally, and promoting mass
participation are but some of the benefits that would outweigh the doubts
people point to in the article below. -Editor
State's
constitution doesn't allow ballot initiatives
Source: http://www.rep-am.com/News/346108.txt
BY PAUL HUGHES REPUBLICAN-AMERICAN
HARTFORD --
The people of Connecticut can't
vote to define marriage, repeal the state income tax or pass a
three-strikes-and-you're-out law.
The Constitution State provides voters no direct constitutional means to put
questions and measures on a statewide ballot for an up-or-down vote.
The state's 1965 constitution doesn't permit initiative and referendum.
Lawmaking is strictly the province of legislatures and governors. Voters only
approve constitutional amendments that legislators propose.
Some in Connecticut want to give voters the right to rewrite the constitution,
pass laws and repeal actions of the legislature themselves, including Gov. M.
Jodi Rell.
"It is a bad idea," said Robert Satter, a retired Superior Court
judge, former state representative, and author of several books on state
government and courts here.
The head of the Connecticut Citizen Action Group also is doubtful.
"I don't know the problem that people think this solves," said Tom
Swan, executive director of the public advocacy group. "It just becomes a
means for moneyed interests to undermine the legislature and the democratic
process."
The state needs initiative and referendum because the legislature oftentimes is
the problem, said Susan Kniep, the president of the Federation of Connecticut
Taxpayer Organizations.
The people need a constitutional means to represent their best interests when
lawmakers become disconnected from the voters, she said.
"Incorporation of that right in Connecticut's constitution will give all
of Connecticut's citizens greater control of their government," said
Kniep, a former mayor of East Hartford.
State Sen. Sam S.F. Caligiuri, R-16th District, also believes voters should be
able to take matters in their own hands.
Caliguiri said the debate on a three-strikes law showed what the people want
doesn't matter if a few powerful legislators disagree.
This session, Caligiuri and Sen. Dan Debicella, R-Shelton, forced the first and
only vote on initiative and referendum in a legislative chamber in the last 13
years. The Senate rejected an amendment that two co-sponsored in a bipartisan
vote.
Today, 24 states have some form of initiative and referendum. Initiative allows
citizens to put a proposed new law or a constitutional amendment to a statewide
vote. A referendum is a popular vote on a measure that a state legislature
passes.
No two states have exactly the same requirements for initiative and referendum.
In general, the procedures involve obtaining a specified number of valid
signatures on certified statewide petitions. If the legal thresholds are met,
then a question goes to a vote at a general or special election.
Another 18 states permit the recall of elected state officials and judges
before the end of a term of office, and 36 states allow the recall of local
officials. In most of the recall states, specific grounds are not required, and
the recall of a state official is by an election.
The General Assembly in Connecticut has never embraced direct democracy --
initiative, referendum or recall.
Interest appeared highest just after the controversial adoption of the state
income tax in 1991. Lawmakers proposed more than two dozen constitutional
amendments on initiative and referendum in a five-year stretch.
Since then, a handful of legislators have continued to introduce legislation
without any success, including Rep. Christopher L. Caruso, D-Bridgeport, House
chairman of the Government Administration and Elections Committee.
Caruso said a lot of legislators worry that initiative and referendum will
unravel legislation and government programs that they have worked hard to enact
and protect.
"I am not afraid of it," he said, adding that Connecticut will
eventually adopt some form of initiative and referendum, including the ability
to amend the state constitution.
On Nov. 4, the ballot will ask voters this constitutionally required question:
"Shall there be a Constitutional Convention to amend or revise the
Constitution of the State?"
Kniep and others see the ballot question as an opening to add the right to
initiative and referendum to the constitution.
"People from every walk of life are coming to understand that we have a
state government that is increasingly unresponsive and unrepresentative of the
will of the people," said Peter Wolfgang, president of the Family
Institute of Connecticut Action.
He said direct initiative is the surest way to reclaim self-government in
Connecticut.
The Family Institute of Connecticut Action wants to pass a constitutional
amendment against same-sex marriage. The group fears the state Supreme Court
may soon allow gay couples to marry.
The California Supreme Court voted May 15 to legalize gay marriage. On Monday,
state officials announced that an initiative that would overturn that decision
qualified for the November ballot. If Connecticut's high court rules for gay
marriage, opponents here won't have that option.
--
DEMOCRACY BY THE PEOPLE
Websites:
http://www.democracybythepeople.blogspot.com/
http://delaesquinacaliente.blogspot.com/
Email: democracybythepeople(at)gmail.com
|