The Parrish Report The National Initiative for Democracy The Democracy Amendment and The Democracy Act Summary
The National Initiative for Democracy (hereinafter "National Initiative") is made up of two important legislative elements: the Democracy Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Democracy Act, a Federal statute law, the purposes of which are respectively to assert in the Constitution the People's sovereign right as lawmakers and to provide in statute the legislative tools to exercise that right. Our constitutional Framers designed the structure of our government and limited its powers but omitted any recognition of the People's lawmaking powers other than the obvious legislative act of setting up a government in the Preamble with "We, the People do ordain" and the legislative act of ratification in Article VII.The National Initiative now completes the constitutional work of the Framers by fashioning a formal process that brings the People into the operation of government as lawmakers, creating "A Legislature of the People", while still maintaining the original design of the People's role in representative government. The formal melding of these two elements brings the American polity closer to a Democracy capable of dealing with the governance problems of the 21st Century, and permits the citizens of the United States to achieve a higher level of civic maturity than has heretofore been possible.
The Democracy Amendment asserts the right and establishes procedures to activate the right of United States citizens to govern themselves as lawmakers, using initiatives, to:
- Amend the United States Constitution,
- Enact federal statutes,
- Enact or amend state or local government constitutions and charters, and
- Enact laws and ordinances at the state and local levels of government.
The Amendment also ordains the establishment of an independent agency, the United States Electoral Trust (hereinafter "Electoral Trust"), to administer the deliberative legislative procedures established in the Democracy Act on behalf of United States citizens and recognizes the nonprofit, nongovernmental organization, Philadelphia II, which conducts a national election giving registered American voters the opportunity to vote to enact the National Initiative. Without the Electoral Trust, the People will not be able to act as truly independent legislators, and without Philadelphia II conducting a national election the People will never have the opportunity to empower themselves to more directly deal with the political issues they see unresolved.
When enacted, the National Initiative will not replace or alter the legislative functioning of the United States Congress, or the legislatures of states, counties and municipalities; nor does it affect the U.S. judicial system at any level of government. Bringing the People into the legislative operation of government as lawmakers adds another Check the People to our system of governmental Checks and Balances. The Legislature of the People does not, however, create a fourth branch of government. The People are the sovereign, above government, who choose to engage in government as legislators. This choice does not reduce their stature to that of the other institutions of government.
The National Initiative neither alters nor replaces the lawmaking power of the People in the states that have existing initiative laws. Instead, under the National Initiative, citizens have the option of filing their initiatives under the procedures of the Democracy Act or under the more familiar initiative laws controlled by representative governments of the states in which they live.
The National Initiative will be submitted to all U.S. citizens in an election conducted on the People's behalf by Philadelphia II. The election enacting the National Initiative is a self-enacting process whereby the People are able to vote for the Amendment and the Act because of the election itself. When the People vote in the election they not only vote for or against the National Initiative, their act of voting legally sanctions the election itself. The self-enacting electoral process employed to enact the National Initiative is similar to the process the Framers of the Constitution used to circumvent the thirteen state governments in order to secure the ratification of the Constitution in 1787-88. The only difference between their efforts to circumvent the Confederated state governments and the present effort to circumvent the Congress and our state governments is the threshold standard used in Article VII of the Constitution and the threshold standard made possible by modern technology used today. The threshold standard employed to enact the National Initiative is inherently more accurate in reflecting the will of the People in that the citizenry make their decisions directly rather than electing delegates to a ratification convention.
THE DEMOCRACY AMENDMENT Section-By-Section Analysis Section 1.
The text makes clear that citizens of the United States have the right to make and change by initiative all constitutional and statute laws in the United States. Though the People exercised this right in the Declaration of Independence and in the ratification of the Constitution where their legislative power is clearly articulated in both the Preamble and Article VII of the Constitution, their right to do so is nowhere clearly specified in the Constitution. Confusion exists in that the Constitution only recognizes the legislative power of the Congress as it pertains to the government. Nevertheless, in a lower venue, the Supreme Court recognizes the legislative authority and power of the People at the state level, where 24 states permit their citizens to enact laws by initiative. Section 1 clears up any possible confusion at the national level.Section 2.
This section triggers the self-enacting process of the National Initiative. As each citizen votes for the National Initiative, he or she not only agrees to the enactment of a constitutional amendment and a federal statute but also agrees to accept as legal the process of the election and whoever conducts the election that permits the citizen to vote on the National Initiative in the first place. This self-enacting trigger is identical to that found in Article VII of the Constitution.Section 3.
This section notes the creation of an Electoral Trust, defines the governance of the Trust by a Board of Trustees and a Director; how the Trustees are elected to staggered terms; and the fact that the Director is appointed by the Trustees. The Section also notes the appointment of an Interim Board to facilitate the election of an elected Board of Trustees, and the appointment by Philadelphia II of the initial Director, who is the Chief Executive Officer of the Electoral Trust, so that the Trust can organize itself as soon as possible and begin to fulfill its mission.The first Director is appointed by Philadelphia II, an organization that has been fostering the principles embodied in the National Initiative since 1992, in order to ensure that, during the crucial initial stages of its implementation, the administration of the Legislature of the People will be managed by a person who is fully committed to those principles, and who has a clear vision of how those principles can and should be executed on the ground.
Section 4.
This section identifies the "initiative" as the legislative tool to be employed by the People to implement the authority and the legislative power asserted in Section 1. Amending the Constitution is made considerably more difficult than enacting statute laws by requiring a majority of registered voters in two elections. Enacting statute law only requires a majority vote of those voting in one election The difference is important and proper in that constitutional law is fundamental law and should be above the whims and passions of normal legislative decision-making. Those states that presently make no serious distinction in this regard find their constitutions littered with technical and administrative detail to a degree that inappropriately impedes the legislature and renders the constitutions hardly understandable or correctable.Section 5.
This section underscores what is self-evident, that only human beings can vote and that, therefore, only natural persons (human beings) registered to vote can sponsor initiatives. This purposely excludes the artifacts of law where corporations are considered artificial persons and are thereby sometimes vested with the political power of a natural person. This section precludes corporations and aliens from sponsorship of initiatives and sets the stage for the next section.Section 6.
This section accomplishes what reform-minded people have been unable to do with lesser statute law over the last two centuries: remove the corrupting influence of money on the political institutions of the nation. "Influence of Money" in this instance broadly includes any form of coercion and inducement. Only a natural person can vote and only a natural person has the right of free speech; therefore only a natural person can give money to affect a vote or speech. The principle is simple and unassailable.Section 7.
This section has the standard language of modern-day constitutional amendments stating that the "Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation." The standard language is changed to substitute "People" for "Congress." This in no way precludes the Congress from also enacting appropriate legislation if it sees fit. The companion Democracy Act, packaged in the National Initiative with the Amendment, is the "appropriate legislation" that sponsors of the National Initiative feel adequately implements the vision and letter of the Amendment stated in Section 1.This section goes on to address a major abuse in those states with initiative laws, where the courts are used to kill initiatives on specious constitutional grounds before the People ever get to see them. This practice by the courts gives elected politicians shelter from making unpopular public decisions. As is the case with all legislative bodies in this country, the court cannot invade the legislature, a separate and independent division of government, to prejudge the quality or legality of legislation it has under consideration. The "Legislature of the People" is accorded the same independence.
THE DEMOCRACY ACT
Section-By-Section AnalysisSection 1. TITLE.
This act is entitled the Democracy Act in recognition of the fact that, together with the Democracy Amendment, it establishes the United States as a true democracy for the first time in history.Section 2. PREAMBLE.
A Preamble is a legislative device to state the reasons for an act, what the act does, and concludes "therefore" with the action. In this instance the Preamble asserts the right of the People to make laws using the initiative as their chosen legislative device. It also sanctions the election process conducted by Philadelphia II and points out that the "Legislature of the People" will legislate concurrently with the legislative bodies of the various levels of government. The underlying principle expressed in the Preamble is that all political power is inherent in and flows from the People who comprise a society. The People may choose to ordain the creation of a government as they did in ratifying the Constitution and therein delegating the legislative power of government to representatives in Congress. This did not in the slightest impair the People's sovereign power to then take unto themselves the legislative power to make laws.Section 3. PROCEDURES.
Deliberative procedures are a vital part of lawmaking. The procedures defined in the Act emulate the procedures employed by Congress that have been developed over more than two hundred years. Like any legislative body, an agency is necessary to administer the procedures. In this instance the Electoral Trust detailed in Section 4 administers legislative procedures on behalf of the People. Political parties impair the impartiality of the administration of representative legislatures. This is not the case for the Legislature of the People where impartiality and transparency are vital for its credibility. This can only be guaranteed by a transparent automatic process in which all initiatives, regardless of sponsorship, are qualified and processed chronologically on a first-come, first-served basis in each distinct step of the initiative process.For example, if the Electoral Trust qualifies two initiatives: Initiative A, which qualifies on June 1 and Initiative B, which qualifies on June 2, the public hearing process for Initiative A will begin before the public hearing process for Initiative B does. Because some steps of the initiative process will take longer for initiatives that are broader in scope or deal with more complex issues, the fact that an initiative qualifies for election before another may not always mean that its election is conducted before the other one. In the above example, initiative A may deal with a complex issue of national scope whereas initiative B may deal with a straightforward issue of municipal scope. In this case it is quite possible that the public hearing and Deliberative Committee processes will take longer to complete for initiative A than for initiative B; consequently, initiative B may achieve election before initiative A does, even though initiative A qualified for election first.
A. Sponsor.
Section 4. UNITED STATES ELECTORAL TRUST.
This is the first of several places in the Act at which it is made clear that all political power resides in individual human beings ("natural persons"), not in collectives, i.e., organizations or groups where the identity of an individual may be lost and an individual's responsibility for his or her actions may be obscured. Hence, only natural persons, as distinguished from corporations, may sponsor an initiative. However, two or more individuals may jointly sponsor an initiative provided that they identify themselves by name. In the remainder of this document, as in the Act, the term "Sponsor" will be used to refer to the individual or individuals who sponsor an initiative. This is also the first of several places in which it is made clear that individuals who will be exercising their political power cannot do so anonymously. Knowledge of the identity of those who sponsor an initiative is both relevant and necessary for an informed decision on the part of the citizens who will be asked to vote on the initiative.B. Form. An initiative has four parts:
Title. A brief caption that identifies the subject of the measure.
Summary. A brief paragraph summarizing the initiative's content.
Preamble. A paragraph documenting the reasons for the initiative and its explicit intent.
Text. The entire language of the initiative, which is expected to be consistent with the Title, Summary and Preamble in all respects.C. Content.
"Matters of public policy" is a broadly inclusive term incorporating policy decisions that may be reflected in a wide variety of documents, such as constitutions, charters, laws, ordinances and resolutions. The governmental jurisdictions covered by this act include federal, state, county and municipal governments or their equivalents (e.g., Parish). An initiative must be applicable to one, and only one, of these levels of government jurisdiction. So, for example, a single initiative could, if enacted, establish law at the state level, affecting every city in that state, if that were the desired intent, rather than have many individual city initiatives. At each governmental level, every law established is applicable in all jurisdictions subordinate to that for which an initiative is written.Before an initiative can be accepted to begin the qualifying process, the Electoral Trust must approve the Title and Summary submitted by the Sponsor to ensure that the Title and Summary accurately reflect and describe the initiative in its entirety. The Electoral Trust, at its sole discretion, may determine that either the Title or Summary, or both, do not accurately reflect the content of the initiative, but it has no power to change either the Title or Summary. In this case, the Sponsor will have the opportunity to revise and resubmit the initiative, multiple times, if necessary. If differences between the Sponsor and the Electoral Trust are not reconciled by negotiation, the Sponsor may sue to require the Electoral Trust to fulfill its ministerial responsibility to approve the Sponsor's Title or Summary. In that event the court can, among other possibilities, specify the wording of the Title and Summary.
The entire reason for this point of control is to enforce the principle that there should be no surprises cloaked in a profusion of words while voters are enticed by innocuous language in an attractive but misleading Title or Summary.
D. Subject.
The text is self-explanatory.E. Word Limit.
The 5,000-word limitation is intended to preclude unnecessarily long measures that offer opportunities for sponsors to cloak legal or technical language that they do not wish to bring to the attention of the voters. It is not an unreasonable limit. The Democracy Act itself, which might be considered the Mother of All Initiatives, is expressed in less than 3,200 words.F. Qualification.
The Democracy Act strikes a balance between the desire to make it easy and minimally expensive for ordinary citizens to place an initiative on the ballot, and the desire to screen out initiatives that an overwhelming majority of voters would not support. After receiving approval of the Electoral Trust for the initiative's Title and Summary, the Sponsor may qualify the initiative for election in any of three ways:
1) Citizen Petition.
In order to show that there is reasonable interest among citizens for the possible enactment of an initiative, a petition may be circulated to secure the signatures of an Electoral Trust-specified number or percentage of voters registered within the relevant jurisdiction. This practice is followed in states that have initiative laws. The practice is continued, but made considerably easier and less expensive, by the provisions of the Democracy Act, which permits signatures to be captured electronically as well as manually. The Electoral Trust will specify the forms and format to be used to collect manual signatures and the mechanisms through which sponsors may create on-line petitions. To ensure the integrity of the process, data captured on-line will be stored and managed on information systems under the direct control of the Electoral Trust. The number of signatures required on any petition will be related to the number of voters who voted in the last presidential election, and will be determined by the Electoral Trust for each government jurisdiction.2) Public Opinion Poll of Citizens.
The use of a public opinion poll of registered voters to determine the level of citizen interest in an initiative has not as yet been employed by any state; however, it will be an inexpensive, as well as the most accurate, method for ascertaining the level of citizen interest in an initiative. The Electoral Trust must approve the polling methodology, the question(s) included in the poll and the firm conducting the poll prior to its being undertaken. The Electoral Trust will also specify the percentage of affirmative responses in the poll required for qualification.3) Legislative Resolution.
The text is self-explanatory.G. Withdrawal.
An initiative's Sponsor may withdraw the initiative from further consideration and processing after it has qualified for election. This option to withdraw the initiative can be exercised by the Sponsor at any time, for any reason, prior to a specific deadline (e.g., a specified number of days after qualification, or a specified number of days after the public hearing, etc.) established by the Electoral Trust. If more than one individual sponsored the initiative, all of those sponsoring individuals must concur in the withdrawal request.H. Public Hearing.
The public hearing is intended to provide an opportunity for members of the public and invited witnesses to express their views on the merits or shortcomings of an initiative. The Electoral Trust will appoint a professional Hearing Officer who will preside at the hearing, accompanied by the Sponsor and delegates from the legislative body of the relevant government jurisdiction. The hearing will be conducted and supported using technology appropriate to the scope and complexity of the initiative.The public hearing is one of the features that distinguishes the initiative procedure created by the Democracy Act from those that exist in the states which permit citizen initiatives. Whereas state initiative laws provide no formal opportunity for public dialog on a qualified initiative, the Democracy Act specifies that information representing all sides of an issue shall be systematically collected and made readily available to citizens before they vote.
I. Deliberative Committee.
The Deliberative Committee will be made up of a number (determined by the Electoral Trust) of citizens selected at random from the voter registration rolls in much the same manner as judicial juries are selected today. Unlike juries, members of the Deliberative Committee will be compensated at their respective usual rates of remuneration, up to a reasonable limit determined by the Electoral Trust. The Deliberative Committee fulfills the same deliberative function that committees and subcommittees provide to the legislative bodies of representative government. In this area it provides an opportunity for ordinary citizens to conduct in-depth analyses and discussions of the initiative's content as well as its actual and potential impact on various elements of society. The Committee will have at its disposal research staff, can call on experts and, under extraordinary circumstances, can commission appropriate studies. The Electoral Trust will determine the duration of the Committee's deliberations, mindful of the complexities of the initiative and of the affected government jurisdiction.The Deliberative Committee's Report will describe the initiative's advantages and disadvantages, costs and benefits, environmental and societal impacts from the viewpoint of ordinary citizens with access to sufficient technical information to make informed judgments. The Deliberative Committee's Report will, in its recommendations, reflect both the majority and minority views of its members. If, after due consideration and consultation with the Sponsor, the Committee concludes that the initiative as originally submitted to the Committee for consideration is not consistent with the Sponsor's intent as it is documented in the Preamble, it may, upon two-thirds vote of its members, make changes to the Title, Summary or text of the initiative. If the Sponsor finds the changes made by the Deliberative Committee to be unacceptable, the Sponsor has three options:
- If the deadline for withdrawal established by the Electoral Trust has not passed, the Sponsor can withdraw the initiative.
- The Sponsor can have its disagreement and its reasoning noted and explained in the Sponsor's own words in the Deliberative Committee's Report.
- The Sponsor can sue the Electoral Trust and let a court of competent jurisdiction adjudicate, among other possibilities, the final language.
J. Legislative Advisory Vote.
The legislative body of the relevant government jurisdiction, e.g., Congress, the State Legislature, County Commission or City Council, will be required to conduct a public advisory vote on the initiative within ninety days after its receipt of the initiative from the Electoral Trust. The method by which the legislative body chooses to conduct this vote is not under the purview of the Electoral Trust; however the Act requires that each legislator's vote be made public. This advisory vote serves the citizenry because:
- knowledge of the views of the individual legislators that comprise the legislative body may be useful as cues to many citizens as they reach their own conclusions about the initiative; and
- knowledge of how their individual representatives voted on the initiative may be useful to many citizens as cues as they cast their votes for or against those legislators when they come up for re-election.
Failure of the legislative body to conduct this advisory vote during the prescribed 90-day period will not delay the election of an initiative.
K. Election.
The Electoral Trust will develop and publish policies, rules and procedures for the scheduling and conduct of elections. As part of this publication, the Electoral Trust may delineate special procedures for addressing in open meetings, not behind closed doors emergency or time-sensitive situations in its scheduling of elections.Voting for an initiative will be held open continuously throughout a time period specified by the Electoral Trust for an initiative election. During this period, voters will be able to vote twenty-four hours a day using any of several methods (e.g., in-person at a kiosk, mail, telephone, Internet, etc.) The Electoral Trust will certify and announce the results of the initiative election at the conclusion of the specified period. The flexibility for voting provided by the Democracy Act is a dramatic improvement over the situation that presently exists in most states, in which voters must appear at a specified polling place during a specified time interval on a single day.
Voting will be made as simple, as convenient, and as efficient as possible for the voter. Citizens should not have to sacrifice time with their families or their work in order to vote. People who are homebound, people who do not have a permanent mailing address, and people who are unable to read, among others, should not be prevented from voting by virtue of their status. Thus the Electoral Trust will provide many alternative vehicles through which, and many venues at which, people may choose to vote at no cost to themselves. For example, voting by mail, in person or through the Internet will all be accommodated, and in the case, for example, of vote-by-mail, the Electoral Trust will provide postage-paid envelopes (or equivalent) for the voters' use in submitting their ballots.
L. Enactment.
Following each initiative election conducted by the Electoral Trust; the Trust, directly or through a third party, may conduct a post-election audit to validate the results.In order for a charter or constitution to be created or amended by initiative, the same initiative must be approved by a majority of registered voters voting in two successive elections. This requirement reflects the greater significance of constitutional and charter amendments as compared with statute law, and the fact that constitutional amendments are not subject to review by the courts. The six-month delay between elections is intended to engender greater reflection on the part of voters before a final decision. In the event that a constitutional or charter amendment fails to secure a majority in either of the two elections, the initiative fails.
M. Effective Date.
The text is self-explanatory.N. Judicial Review.
Because of the Separation of Powers Doctrine in the United States Constitution, courts have no power to interfere with representative legislatures by making determinations regarding the constitutionality of proposed legislation. However, courts presently can and do interfere with the exercise of citizens' legislative powers in states that have initiative laws, often denying citizens the right to vote on issues. The Democracy Act makes it explicit that the courts must treat the Legislature of the People no differently than they do any existing representative legislative body. It also makes explicit the fact that courts cannot adjudicate amendments to the United States Constitution enacted by the citizens; again, as is presently the case for amendments made by Congress, state legislatures and conventions under Article V of the Constitution.O. Promotional Communications.
Clearly, it is in the best interests of the citizenry not to allow anonymity of those who push hardest for or against an initiative. Knowledge of the identities of the individuals who vigorously support or oppose an initiative, in and of itself, can also be useful to a voter in determining his or her own views on the issue. Therefore, those who are responsible for a promotional communication, however it may be conveyed to the public, must identify themselves within that communication. The Electoral Trust will promulgate regulations specifying how this required information will be incorporated in promotional communications.P. Campaign Financing.
It is the purpose and effect of the National Initiative to mitigate the influence of money within government as it relates to initiatives. Only natural persons can contribute funds in an initiative campaign. In legal parlance a natural person is a de facto person, as distinguished from a de jure or virtual person such as a corporation. The logic is simple, since only a natural person can vote then only a natural person should be able to contribute money for the purpose of supporting or opposing an initiative. The effect of money spent in a campaign is mitigated in another respect. Voters have demonstrated uncanny common sense in making political decisions when they have the basic facts surrounding an issue. The Democracy Act is designed in such a way that the Electoral Trust prior to and throughout the voting period will make all pertinent facts about an initiative available to voters. The effect of this publicly funded communication process will be to substantially reduce the impact of campaign contributions. This section of the Act is not intended to prohibit organizations from communicating the organizations' positions on initiatives to their members, stockholders or other stakeholders; or to prohibit the news media from editorializing on initiatives. It is aggressive acts of coercion or inducement, whether covert or overt, that this section intends to prohibit.Q. Financial Disclosure.
The Electoral Trust will publish all financial disclosures on the Internet web site (or functional equivalent) it maintains for each initiative. The Electoral Trust will require all those contributing sums above a certain threshold to be identified on the web site. Failure to comply with the contribution and disclosure sections of the law is a felony punishable by prison time and a substantial fine. Abuses will occur but may be expected to decline dramatically once some law-breakers, such as, for instance, corporate executives found guilty of conspiring to illegally contribute funds from a corporation's treasury, have been jailed.
The Electoral Trust will be an independent agency of the Federal Government similar to, for example, the Federal Reserve Board. One facet of that similarity is that the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Board, like the Electoral Trust, is not under the authority of the President of the United States or any other government entity. But, unlike the Federal Reserve Board, whose members are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, and unlike all other independent agencies of the federal government, the members of the Board of Trustees of the Electoral Trust will be elected by the citizens of the states they represent, and are not subject to confirmation by any government entity. The Electoral Trust is a true agency of the PeopleThe Electoral Trust will organize itself under the leadership of the Director to pursue its mission with transparency as soon as possible after the enactment of the National Initiative. The term transparency refers to the fact that every aspect of the Electoral Trust's activities will, to the extent feasible, be open and accessible to the public. This information will equip the citizens to make changes, if they so choose, using initiatives, in any element of the Electoral Trust or to impeach any person who holds a position in the Electoral Trust.
A. Mission.
Section 5. APPROPRIATIONS.
The Electoral Trust's mission will be to establish, implement, administer and maintain the policies, procedures, regulations, systems, facilities and other resources required for the effective and deliberative exercise of the citizens' legislative power; and to enforce the provisions of the Democracy Amendment, the Democracy Act and the policies, procedures and regulations resulting from them. This section emphasizes the fact that, with the exception of authority granted by Section 3.I to Deliberative Committees, the Electoral Trust is forbidden from altering any initiative in any way.B. Board of Trustees.
The Board of Trustees is the governing board of the Electoral Trust. It will be responsible for establishing policy and performing the oversight necessary to determine that the policy is being adhered to or is in need of change.
1) Membership.
C. Interim Board.
The text is self-explanatory
2) Term of Office.
The text is self-explanatory.
3) Removal Of Trustees.
If a Trustee violates the oath of office, or for other reasons determined by the Board, that Trustee may be removed if three-fourths of the members of the Board vote for his or her removal. The citizens of the state or other jurisdiction (e.g., Puerto Rico) that elected a Trustee may, at any time and for any reason, initiate and conduct an election to remove (recall) that Trustee.4) Vacancies.
Vacancies on the Board of Trustees can occur as a result of removal, death, resignation, or legal incapacity of a member and are to be filled in a timely manner. Vacancies will be filled by majority vote of the total membership of the Board after suitable consideration and evaluation of appropriate candidates. The Board will establish procedures for identifying and considering candidates from the state or other jurisdiction identified with the vacant position for evaluation by the Board.6) Meetings.
This "sunshine" or transparency section is intended to ensure that the activities of the Electoral Trust will always remain open to the public. Except as required by law, meetings of the Board will be publicized in advance using various media and will be recorded and the records held available for public inspection; and many meetings may be broadcast in real time on radio or TV. Examples of laws that might preclude public inspection of meetings or the records resulting therefrom include Title 5, Part I, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, Sections 552 and 552b of the U.S. Code, which prohibit public access to meetings that involve, among other things, personnel rules where disclosure of information of a personal nature would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy or contract negotiations in which proprietary information could be unnecessarily exposed.
As explained on page 2 herein, referring to Section 2 of the Democracy Amendment, an Interim Board of Directors will be appointed in accordance with this Act. This temporary Board will have strictly limited powers. Their policy and oversight responsibilities start and end with the conduct of the first national election to elect the members of the Board of Trustees. In such time as they may have available during that period, they will be expected to employ their expertise as election officials to establish policies and oversee the commencement of the lifetime registration of citizens of the United States qualified to vote under the Act.
D. Director.
The Director is the Chief Executive Officer of the Electoral Trust and is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the Trust and the implementation of its policies and regulations. The Act empowers the Director to enter into contracts, hire staff, acquire facilities, and take such additional actions, as he or she deems necessary to fulfill the responsibilities of the position.The position of Director will clearly be of critical importance to the success of the Electoral Trust and ultimately to the success of establishing a Legislature of the People. Members of the Interim Board may not be familiar with the concepts embodied in the Democracy Amendment and the Democracy Act, and many may even be opposed to the dilution of their governmental powers that will occur under the Legislature of the People. Therefore it will be essential that the first Director be a person who has a comprehensive understanding and appreciation of the vision embodied in the Democracy Amendment and the Democracy Act and whose fundamental mission is to empower the People by making them lawmakers.
To address this requirement, the Democracy Amendment assigns the authority to appoint the first Director of the Electoral Trust to the Board of Directors of Philadelphia II, the nonprofit corporation conducting, on behalf of the People, the national election for the enactment of the National Initiative for Democracy.
One of the principal responsibilities of the first Director will be to conduct the election to replace the Interim Board with the first Board of Trustees elected by the People.
If the position of Director is vacated prior to the completion of a full six-year term, a person who receives a majority vote of the total membership of the Board of Trustees will fill the position. The Board of Trustees will establish procedures for identifying and considering candidates to fill any such vacancy in a timely manner.
Because of the unique nature of the position, it should be incumbent on each Director, working with Board members, to carefully describe the position and the desirable attributes to be expected in those who will assume the position; then begin identifying potential replacements for the Director early in each Director's term in office.
1) Term of Office.
The text is self-explanatory.2) Removal of Director.
The text is self-explanatory.
3) Vacancy.
The text is self-explanatory.E. Oath or Affirmation of Office.
By taking the oath or affirmation of office, each person responsible in any way for the administration and implementation of the Democracy Amendment and the Democracy Act swears her or his allegiance both to the Constitution and to the principle that the citizens of the United States are the ultimate governmental authority. Failure to comply with the oath can be cause for removal, or the subject of a recall election or suit in a federal court.F. Organization and Responsibilities.
This section simply affirms the authority and responsibilities of the Electoral Trust to fulfill its mission as an independent agency of the United States government. In this respect, it will be no different from other independent agencies such as the Federal Reserve Board, the National Science Foundation and the National Traffic and Safety Board.
1) Existing Law.
The precedence of the Democracy Act over existing law, when there is a conflict, is established in Section 1 of the Democracy Amendment, which specifies that the legislative powers of the citizens, as asserted in the Democracy Amendment and implemented through the Democracy Act, may not be impaired by legislation enacted by elected legislatures, or by regulations promulgated by the executive branch at any level of government (federal, state or local) of the United States. In all other respects the Board of Trustees, the Director and the employees of the Electoral Trust are subject to the laws of all governments of the United States.2) Voter Registration.
The Electoral Trust's voter registration activities and the voter registration database created therefrom do not replace any voter registration procedures established by state law.The Electoral Trust will devise a system to facilitate lifetime registration for qualified citizens of the United States. The Electoral Trust will establish and maintain a database of all registered voters that will permit citizens to exercise their legislative power under the Democracy Amendment and the Democracy Act irrespective of the municipality, county, or state in which they reside, provided that they retained their United States citizenship. Moreover, once registered by the Electoral Trust, a citizen will never have to re-register to vote, regardless of place of residence. Once registered, any citizen will have his or her voting privileges suspended for the duration of the time he or she is incarcerated as a result of having been convicted of a felony crime or is adjudged by a court to be incompetent.
3) Research and Drafting Service.
The Electoral Trust will provide the assistance of a legislative Research and Drafting Service to assist sponsors in drafting their initiatives, to eliminate ambiguity and reduce the chance that an initiative, once enacted, can be successfully challenged in court for technical or constitutional reasons. Such a service is normally provided to members of representative legislative bodies. Such a service assures an elevated quality of initiative texts and uniform legislative practice. Research avoids the creation of redundant legislative proposals and shares a compendium of knowledge relevant to all governmental jurisdictions.4) Communication.
Knowledge is the key prerequisite to good legislative deliberation and offers the best opportunity for a commonsense judgment by a lawmaker. The Democracy Act is designed to provide the voter with the most complete and objective information possible so that the voter will have sufficient knowledge about the initiative to render a competent judgment. This information is provided entirely at government expense, as is the case for representative legislative bodies. This information will be communicated to the voters in a timely manner using a variety of media and taking advantage of available technologies.When an initiative is qualified for election, the Electoral Trust will create a web site for that initiative to which any member of the public may refer to determine the initiative's status and to review the information compiled to date on that initiative by the Electoral Trust. The Hearing Report, the report of the Deliberative Committee, the results of the Legislative Advisory Vote, and other information about the initiative will be posted to the web site as soon as they become available. Thirty days prior to the election of each initiative, the Electoral Trust will commence a public information campaign using television, radio, and/or print media; plus a pamphlet mailed to each household in the relevant jurisdiction, to summarize in a balanced and objective manner all the information assembled about the initiative.
5) Hearings and Deliberative Committees.
The Public Hearing will provide an opportunity for proponents and opponents of an initiative to make their case in testimony, to receive testimony from experts, for the public to observe, dialog with and question the Sponsor and representatives of the relevant elected legislative body. The Electoral Trust will provide a venue for this hearing appropriate to the affected governmental jurisdiction. For example, an issue that affects a small town might be held in city hall or even a school auditorium, whereas initiatives affecting a populous city, a state or the nation as a whole might be conducted via interactive TV on a network operated by the Electoral Trust. Because the Deliberative Committee will be made up entirely of citizens chosen at random from the voter rolls, many of whom may have little or no experience in such an environment, it will be incumbent on the Electoral Trust to provide process experts, skilled facilitators and subject matter experts to assist the Committee members in organizing and conducting their deliberations. The Electoral Trust must also provide administrative and clerical support, facilities and equipment that will permit the Committee to perform and record its work and its findings efficiently and effectively.6) Election of Initiatives and Board of Trustees.
The text is self-explanatory.G. Budgets.
The text is self-explanatory.
As with all agencies of the Federal Government, the operation of the Electoral Trust will be funded by specific appropriations from the United States Treasury. Whereas appropriations for all other federal agencies are authorized by acts of Congress, the citizenry permanently authorize the funding of the Electoral Trust through this Democracy Act. The Electoral Trust's use of appropriated funds will be subject to two levels of audit: first by an independent audit function within the Electoral Trust; secondly, like all other Federal government agencies, by the General Accounting Office.In preparing for and conducting the election for the National Initiative, Philadelphia II will rely upon the generosity of donors and may borrow funds necessary to finance facilities, staff, contracts, equipment and/or other legitimate expenses essential to this election. Inasmuch as the funds from these loans will be used on behalf of the People, affording them the opportunity to empower themselves by enacting the National Initiative, it is appropriate that public funds be used to repay these debts, after they have been audited and certified by the Electoral Trust.
The last sentence of this section requires Congress to appropriate funds on an annual basis to support the operations of the Electoral Trust. The amount of these appropriations will, of course, depend on a combination of factors, including the amount requested by the Electoral Trust in its budget submissions, federal tax receipts and competing priorities. If at some time the citizenry come to feel that the Congress is consistently remiss in carrying out this duty, they may, by initiative, adjust the priorities of the members of Congress.
Section 6. SEVERABILITY.
This section simply ensures that, if any part of the Democracy Act is successfully challenged in court, only the section specifically invalidated by the courts will become inoperative; the other sections will remain in full force.Section 7. ENACTMENT BY THE PEOPLE.
A. The Ballot.
The ballot for the National Initiative for Democracy contains sufficient information to permit Philadelphia II and appropriate auditors to verify that the persons submitting ballots are who they say they are, to verify that they are in fact United States citizens registered to vote, and to permit Philadelphia II to contact them to confirm that their votes were properly and accurately recorded. Clearly, not all voters will be able or required to provide all of the information requested on the ballot. For example, some voters will not have an e-mail address. Others may not have a permanent street address or a telephone. As long as the ballot provides sufficient information for Philadelphia II to contact and verify the identity and registration status of the voter, and provides that the submitted ballot contains a "yes" or "no" vote and the signature and date of execution of the ballot, it will be counted in the election. Unlike elections conducted by government agencies, the election for the National Initiative will provide an opportunity for voters to change their votes at any time, as many times as they like, until the election is certified. This provides unprecedented flexibility for voters, permitting them to update their votes when, for example, they receive additional information, or simply have a change of heart. The information collected by Philadelphia II from citizens will not to be used for any purpose other than recording, verification and counting of votes.B. The Election.
In order for the National Initiative to be enacted, both of the following must occur:
- The number of registered voters voting "Yes" in the election for the National Initiative must be greater than one-half the number of registered voters who voted in the most recent presidential election.
- The number of "Yes" votes (in favor of the National Initiative) must exceed the number of "No" votes.
When both of these conditions have been met, the Democracy Amendment and the Democracy Act assume the force of law on the date that the President of Philadelphia II certifies the election to the governments of the United States, each state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Territories of the United States.
Section 8. DEFINITIONS.
The text is self-explanatory.