Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
Direct Democracy
Referendums and the Initiative
In a direct democracy every adult member of a community, state, or nation who wants to be politically active can participate in civic affairs and vote directly as political decisions are made, with the votes of the majority determining the outcome.
An election in which the people of a community, state, or nation vote directly to determine whether a proposed law or constitutional amendment is enacted or rejected is called a referendum. Referendums can be called by various methods: by a legislative body, according to mandates in a constitution, or by the people through the “initiative", which gives citizens the power to initiate and enact legislation, including constitutional amendments, without the involvement or approval of a legislature.
The adoption of provisions for referendums and/or the initiative in twenty-three states in the twenty-year period between 1898 and 1918 was one of the most important and enduring victories for democracy in American history. There are currently twenty-six states in America that have provisions for referendums and/or the initiative in their state constitutions. There is no provision for referendums or the initiative in the Constitution of the United States.
The main problem with referendums and the initiative in the states that already have provisions for them, is that calling a referendum or putting a proposal on the ballot through the initiative is far more difficult and expensive than it should be. The details of the initiative process vary from state to state, but getting legislation passed through the initiative process is never easy. Gathering the required number of signatures is a significant challenge in every state. Election officials in most states with the initiative are empowered to reject signatures on petitions and it is not uncommon for a significant percentage of the signatures collected to be rejected for various (often unspecified) reasons, which effectively (and unjustly) increases the number of signatures required to get a proposal on the ballot. Educating voters about a ballot proposal typically requires raising millions of dollars, especially if there is opposition to a proposal from well-funded special interests.
Despite these difficulties, states with referendums and the initiative have been able to increase the minimum wage, expand Medicaid, repeal anti-worker so-called “right-to-work” laws, enact ethics laws, and pass other laws supported by the people but opposed by “representatives” who do not truly represent the will of the people.
Some politicians in states that have provisions for referendums and the initiative, unhappy with the occasional success of ballot proposals, have introduced legislation that would make it even more difficult to use the initiative. If these antidemocratic amendments are enacted, it will be a significant setback for democracy.
Enacting Perfect Democracy Amendments will be a significant victory for democracy.
Perfect Democracy Amendments
In a true democracy, proposed legislation should be put on the ballot through the initiative (for approval or rejection by voters in a referendum) anytime it appears likely that a legislature has failed to enact legislation that is supported by most of the citizens of a community, state, or nation. Veto referendums should be called anytime it appears likely that legislation that does not have the support of most of the citizens has been enacted by a legislature.
Perfect Democracy Amendments will extend the use of referendums and the initiative to the federal government and to the states that do not yet provide for them.
In states that already have provisions for referendums and the initiative, Perfect Democracy Amendments will make it easier to call referendums and use the initiative by allowing citizens to sign petitions electronically, by submitting Statements of Support through Online Accounts for Politically Active Citizens.
A system allowing citizens of the European Union to submit Statements of Support for initiative petitions online, rather than signing paper petitions, has been in place since 2011.
Not only is signing petitions online easier and more convenient, but when people sign statements of support securely online, every is that all the statements of support can reasonably be considered legitimate. There is no need for election officials to check signatures and no signatures are preemptively rejected.
Research Supports Direct Democracy
The results of the research that Gilens and Page share in their book Democracy in America? What Has Gone Wrong and What We Can Do About It, is very supportive of direct democracy, showing that “public opinion is generally deliberative – it generally reflects the best available information and the values and interests of the citizenry.” As a result, when voting directly in referendums: "the public is likely to be a more certain guardian of its own interests than any feasible alternative.”
Anticipating and Addressing Objections
One argument likely to be made against making it easier for citizens to call referendums and use the initiative is that voters are not as well-informed or knowledgeable as their elected “representatives” regarding most important issues. The research conducted by Gilens and Page refutes that argument. They found that:
“An exhaustive study of thousands of survey questions that had been asked over a 50-year period found that Americans’ collective policy preferences do not in fact suffer from the alarming defects that are often attributed to them.”
“On…day-to-day pocketbook concerns - and on such matters as neighborhood crime, the challenge of holding down a job with no paid sick leave, the difficulty of finding affordable childcare, or the (un)reliability of public transportation - ordinary Americans may actually have better first-hand information than elites who live more rarefied sheltered lives.”
On other issues: “Individuals form their opinions through a collective social process that brings deliberation and information to bear on the issues of the day.”
“Experts debate the merits of alternative public policies. Commentators and politicians expressed their views through various media. A set of relatively attentive citizens - without having to memorize a lot of facts - can figure out what sorts of policies are favored by leaders whom they trust to have expertise and to share their own values. Attentive citizens adopt those policy preferences for themselves, and - again without needing to learn or recite a lot of facts - communicate them to friends, family, and coworkers who also share similar values.”
“In a word, public opinion is generally deliberative – it generally reflects the best available information and the values and interests of the citizenry.”
As a result: “Most Americans - on most major issues - are able to form a general idea about what they want the government to do.”
Another argument likely to be made against making it easier for citizens to call referendums and use the initiative is that we will be inundated with too many ballot proposals, including some proposals that are frivolous or dangerous. That could prove to be the case and, if that is the case, it may be necessary to make some adjustments, most likely by increasing the number of signatures required to call referendums or use the initiative. But the problems right now are that it is far too difficult to call referendums and use the initiative and that there is no provision for referendums or the initiative at the federal level or in half the states. Both Congress and state legislatures are failing to enact a great deal of critically needed legislation that has majority support among the people. And a great deal of legislation that does not appear to have the support of a majority of the people is being enacted.
It is important to strike the proper balance between making it too easy and too difficult to call referendums and for the people of a community, state, or the nation, to put proposals on the ballot.
The best way to limit the number of referendums called and the number of proposals put on the ballot through the initiative is to make Congress and state legislatures a more accurate reflection of the will of the people. Implementing Ranked Choice Voting would help with that. Combining Ranked Choice Voting with multiple-member districts would be even better. Implementing systems of Proxies for Citizens would be the best way to make Congress and state legislatures truly democratic institutions.
Why Direct Democracy is better than Representative Democracy
Congress and State Legislatures do not "represent" the people
Observation and experience tell us, and the research conducted by Page and Gilens confirms, that “majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts” through Congress and state legislatures. “And policy may diverge sharply from the desires of the public if officials ignore those who elected them and pay attention to lobbyists instead.”
“In our electoral systems, private money plays a huge part. Neither major party can function without many millions of dollars.” And “Mega donors of both parties tend to agree in opposing certain policies that most Americans favor.” Presidents and members of Congress need to raise enormous amounts of money to get elected (and re-elected continually). As a result, they are much more likely to listen to mega donors than to the people they supposedly represent.
More likely to be "Pure" - Less likely to be Corrupted
Experience has consistently demonstrated the truth of Lord Acton’s well-known observation that “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” With that being the case, distributing power as broadly and equally as possible is the best way to minimize corruption in a government. It is far easier to corrupt presidents and governors, judges, or a majority of the members of a legislative body than it is to corrupt a majority of the politically active citizens in a community, state, or nation.
It is possible to make direct democracy less than pure. The most common ways that direct democracy is corrupted are by posing questions put on the ballot in a deceptive or confusing manner, by imposing super-majority requirements for adoption of proposed legislation, or by limiting who can participate in elections.
Despite occasional attempts to mislead voters in referendums, direct democracy is sometimes referred to as “pure democracy” because it is more difficult to corrupt a government when power is distributed equally among all the citizens of a community, state, or nation and exercised by citizens voting directly.
Referendums Shift the Focus to Issues instead of Politicians
At Government by the People, our mission is to provide education and resources to support mental health and wellness in our community.
Referendums promote Consensus instead of Competition
We offer a variety of programs and services to support mental health, including counseling, support groups, and educational workshops.
Direct Democracy is more likely to promote the Common Good
“Collective preferences tend to be solid. They tend to reflect the underlying needs and values of the whole body of citizens,
in light of the best available information from experts and commentators."
Majority rule…tends to produce public policies that benefit the largest number of people and promote the common good.”
[Page and Gilens]
Rationale For Perfect Democracy Amendments
In a true democracy, the amendment process itself should be democratic.
The Declaration of Independence acknowledged our “Right” to alter the form of our government and “to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles and organizing its Powers in such Form” as seems to us “most likely to effect (our) Safety and Happiness.”
There are numerous anti-democratic provisions embedded in the body of our Constitution. To make America a more perfect democracy, we need to “alter” the form of our government. The fact that an anti-democratic amendment process is one of those anti-democratic provisions makes it extremely difficult to amend our Constitution.
The citizens of seventeen states already have the power to propose amendments to their state constitutions through the initiative process. In most cases, amendments are ratified by a simple majority vote in a statewide referendum. That power should be extended to the people of the remaining states and, collectively, to the people of the United States.
By making the process of amending our Constitution itself extremely antidemocratic, the fifty-five men who drafted our Constitution made it nearly impossible to change our form of government and locked an antidemocratic system in place. In effect, allowing the dead to govern the living. The decisions made by fifty-five men over 200 years ago should be more amenable to being modified or reversed to meet the needs and serve the interests of the present generation of American citizens.
The ability of a minority of the members of Congress (and state legislatures) to block much needed reforms is bad enough. The ability of a minority to extend their tyranny over time, tyrannizing us from beyond the grave, is considerably worse.
A number of enlightened political philosophers, political scientists, and presidents made the point that -
The Dead Have No Right to Govern the Living
Some of the delegates to the Federal Convention of 1787 argued (in vain) that -
Congress should not be involved in amending the Constitution
George Mason’s concerns have been echoed by others:
At least so far, these dire warnings have not proven accurate with regard to the Unites States. The Constitution of the United States is the oldest constitution in the world continuously in effect even though it is the most difficult constitution in the world to amend. With the painful and bloody exception of the Civil War, we have so far avoided massive violence is settling constitutional issues.
We, the people, should be able to amend constitutions by simple majorities. Neither Congress nor state legislatures should be able to “check” our right to amend our Constitution.
A new kind of PAC - Politically Active Citizens
Communication is vital in a broad-based grassroots movement and in making direct democracy as effective as possible in a nation as large as the United States. The acronym PAC ordinarily stands for "Political Action Committee" We are developing a different kind of PAC - "Politically Active Citizens". If you would like to be part of our grassroots movement, please provide your email address:
The material on this website is adapted from a soon to be published book: Government by the People: A Citizen's Guide to Making America a Perfect Democracy by Winston Apple.
Content is Copyright 2024 Gary Winston Apple, unless otherwise noted..
Permission is granted to share with proper attribution. All Rights Reserved.
This website was created by, is maintained by, and paid for by Winston Apple,
Powered by GoDaddy