| Chapter
Four
Many forms of Government
have been tried, and will be tried in this world of
sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect
or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy
is the worst form of Government except all those other
forms that have been tried from time to time.
Winston Churchill
I know of no safe depository
of the ultimate powers of Society but the People themselves:
and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise
control with a wholesale discretion, the remedy is not
to take it from them, but to inform their discretion
by education.
Thomas Jefferson
I am a firm believer in the people.
If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet
any national crisis. The great point is to bring them
the real facts.
Abraham Lincoln
The history of the world since
the American Revolution in 1776 teaches us that people
can govern themselves and actually create more wealth
and progress in the process.
As discussed in The Federalist Papers
and Tom Paine's Common Sense , the purest
form of self-government is a democracy where people
consider issues and vote directly on them. However,
the size of a deliberating group was limited by the
number of people who could fit into a town hall or under
a tree in the village square. As in ancient Greece and
Rome , only 5,000 people could hear a speaker at one
time.
The solution to this limitation was to
choose representatives who could travel to a central
meeting place to deliberate and decide on behalf of
their constituents. This representative democracy worked
because the elected officials had the time to legislate
and those they represented regularly had the opportunity
to vote them out of office.
The complexity of the 21st Century overwhelms
the simplicity of the system America 's Founding Fathers
created. The system is still valid but instantaneous
information, dramatically increased political polarization,
the spiraling costs of politics and end-of-the-world
issues, including global warming, weapons of mass destruction
and infectious diseases confound the decision making
process.
We can use modern technology to make sure
the government governs for the people. We can make the
government go public by putting our representatives
where everyone can see them.
The first step is to put the government
on television, where we can watch what it's doing. We
saw this work with Watergate. We could see who was honest
and strove to bring out the truth. We could also see
who didn't.
Televising the main legislative body activities,
the floor shows and speeches isn't enough. All hearings
and committee meetings also need to be publicly aired.
Expert testimony that defines issues and offers solutions
must be available. And the legislators need to be watched
by the citizens.
The next step is to use a computerized
database so facts are available while a matter is under
discussion. We often see our public servants disputing
the facts. This is wasteful and unproductive. If they
do not have accurate facts, how can they propose effective
solutions?
The final step is to make voters' opinions
available. Nowadays, legislators claim to know their
constituents' true wishes. But we have the tools to
verify those opinions and facts: the television, telephone
and computer.
While an issue is under discussion, people
could express their opinions by phone and computer.
These could be compiled instantly, showing the real
opinions of the people before a decision is made.
To show how this could work, let's say
that Congress was debating Daylight Savings Time. Facts
and expert testimony would be presented. The requisite
and involved government agencies such as the Library
of Congress, the Congressional Budget Office and the
Government Accounting Office can provide information
with the latest in graphics.
After representatives discussed the information
fully, they would have time to explain to their respective
constituents their upcoming vote. Then the citizens
could express their opinions before the vote by phone
or computer. For example, you could dial 111 to get
into the system and then enter one of these selections:
1. 
Total agreement.
2. 
Mostly in agreement.
3. 
Neutral.
4. 
Mostly in disagreement.
5. 
Total disagreement.
Tabulation of opinions falling into each
category would be displayed on a board above the legislator.
Those watching could actually see the opinions of the
constituents and the legislator would have a chance
to educate them and explain why he voted as he did.
The legislators could vote their conscience
and best judgment. Thus they could be in direct communication
with their constituents during the actual decision-making.
When the legislators are doing a good
job, people would show less interest in the process.
But an economic downturn or an emergency would bring
us all to our TV sets, ready to use our phones and computers.
As we'll discuss in the next chapter,
retirees could pick a subject area such as education,
health care or defense, to follow. At the end of one
year they would be fairly knowledgeable and would become
part of the “Jury” for their area of interest. After
five years, they would become a “Senior” and could contribute
their accumulated experience and wisdom. This way, as
legislators come and go, the government no longer would
need to depend on special interest lobbyists for information
and institutional memory. The Jury and the Seniors would
remember what already had been tried.
Before the public expressed an opinion,
it could see in each corner of the TV screen what the
Jury, Seniors and subject matter experts (scientists,
doctors, engineers, etc.) thought as well as what a
random sample of people with no special knowledge thought.
With these four guides for comparison, the public could
then express opinions and make decisions intelligently
and calmly.
All government systems except democracy
are based on a largely one-way flow of information:
orders going from the top to the bottom. The power elite
comprises the top, the rich and powerful (whether capitalist
or socialist). Those at the bottom are told what to
do. Eventually those at the top need to watch those
at the bottom to prevent change.
In a democracy, people can talk back with
their opinions and votes. We do not need to fear big
government, bureaucracies and secret police. We can
look wherever we wish, express our opinion and see that
the officials carry it out. We can watch the watchers.
We can have a say. We can be represented.
We already have the tools. We no longer have to worry
about power corrupting our public servants.
If things are not going well, we can change
leaders with the next election. We do not need to change
the rules or the United States Constitution.
Around the world, we do not need dictators
or totalitarian states. We simply need a two-way flow
of communication.
We do not need a revolution. We do need
to express our thoughts together.
And use our common sense.
|
