Talk
of direct democracy may be moot. Dennis Kucinich read articles of impeachment on
Monday night on cspan and there's been a media blackout on it. Not one mention
so far. Collusion on the part of the media to suppress the information. This may
be a sign of the end of democracy. It's peculiar to say the
least.
Video part-1
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1qy3z7XWtQc
Video part-2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dv2SdTeN7dY&NR=1
This week
also saw Senator Karen Johnson from Arizona on cspan calling for a new
independent 9 11 Investigation. The media has had a campaign of character
assassination going against her for the past two weeks prior. Now there is no
sign of her in the media.
There
are many people trying to find out what's going on but it's turned into the
proverbial elephant in the room. People have actually told me not to ask
questions. It seems the worlds gripped by fear of government and why not they
are the real terrorists. Since Kennedy was shot the President has been selected
rather than elected.
http://ca.youtube.com/user/Slavesrevolt
Cheers. Dave
-----Original Message----- From: Jim Powell
[autoinfo(at)acenet.co.za] Sent: June 11, 2008 6:19
AM To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net 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
|