The Four Legs of Democracy (How to Measure Democracy)

Our Planet has no genuine governmental Democracy as of 2011.

Some places, such as California, come close but we still await – the real thing. Many “leaders” want you to believe that the only criteria necessary for a democracy is allowing people to vote. As we show here, that is far from true, and as you may be aware — even voting can be wholly eclipsed or nullified.

“Political Gap” Means Democracy is Lacking

Democracy is defined as “the Consent of the Governed.” It means shared power or shared governance. It can not reasonably be called consent when the most important political decisions made by government officials vary grossly from the will of most voters, from protection of the politically weak, and from the public good.

Democracy is war without guns. Prior to the time of Napoleon if you had more than half the armed soldiers, you almost always won the battles and the wars.

We now have a far less bloody way of solving major political power disputes. If you have more than half the votes, you (should) win elections. This modern trend is notably less messy both physically and emotionally.

The continuum of power sharing has dictatorship on one end (no power shared) and at the other end is – the required voter approval of all policy and priorities of lawmaking, law application and law enforcement. The four fundamental democracy requirements described here provide a threshold about halfway between those two extremes.

Meaningful Voting = No “Political Gap”

Real democracy occurs when the decisions actually reflect the will of the majority of those affected while protecting the rights of all minorities; when there is no significant or long lasting Political Gap between the will of the people and the actions of the leaders.

Votes must make a difference. We have a huge “Political Gap” in the United States. Poll after poll, decade after decade shows a vast majority of the American public wants changes that elected officials refuse to adopt. The issues range from Campaign Finance Reform, to Health Care for All, to genuine clean air and water, and protected natural places.

The reasons for this are legion, but the only important point is all those issues would be law, funded and enforced if our Country’s “Public Will” had meaning.

This article outlines the four bare minimums required for an operating democracy.

Real democracy, like a table, is supported by vital four legs. The essential legs are court enforced freedom of speech and of publication, an easy way for citizens to put issues on the public agenda – generally known as an initiative process, allowing everyone to vote, and severing money (campaign contributions or other gifts) from political decisions.

Facade or rhetorical democracy (“Democrafacade”) is when one of these critical legs is missing, is skipped, or when one or more of the legs is short or weak. As we will examine, just as there are tricky battle maneuvers, elections and other vital democracy components can have loopholes that make the appearance of democracy a dangerous facade.

1. Free Speech and Media, Fully Enforced by Courts

Even today in 2011, people are regularly murdered (sometimes officially) in some countries for merely publicly criticizing about their governments (e.g. Nigeria’s Ken Saro Wiwa in 1995). Murder of citizens protesting government abuse is so common that Amnesty International (AI) has a policy of not conducting a campaign from within a country where AI is trying to stop the human rights violations (even in the U.S.A. !)

Without Free Speech and freedom of all media to publish information highly critical of government, which might be repugnant or even false information, there can be no other freedoms or rights. This facet is primary; the most important. How can anyone ever get informed to vote if free speech and criticism is prohibited or even merely discouraged ?

If you mistakenly believe United States citizens are fully informed by US media you might visit the Project Censored web site at California’s Sonoma State University.

a. Assertion of Free Speech, Official and Formal

How many Countries protect free speech in their constitutions? There are dramatically more than when I first began this article in 1996. Then there were only a few including the United States, Germany, Japan, Spain (and recently Venezuela).

England, Canada, and Switzerland do not even pretend to protect free speech. Germany’s protection has significant exceptions.

England’s system of common law does not define or provide a right of free speech. Consider England’s “Official Secrets Act” which is regularly used to halt any speech the government finds offensive (embarrassing). Amazingly, England makes having certain types of literature, including poems, a crime. Worse, they’ve tried to enforce this recently.

Even the United States Constitution fails the free speech test in three major ways.

1) It allows people to sign way their right to free speech when entering a contract – such as getting a job where workers do not have a right to free speech on corporate property. An unalienable right to free speech will not allow an employer to take away your rights to free speech.

2) Unlike California’s constitution, the U.S. constitution does not allow you to sue government or a business for restricting your free speech; it only allows a suit to defend your free speech if your are charged with lawbreaking. California’s rights are called self-executing rights. You can use them to sue government or a business for restricting your free speech or any other California Constitution right.

3) Because so very few corporations now own most TV, radio, magazines, bookstores and newspapers, and because the U.S. Supreme Court has falsely given corporations the right to free speech – corporations drown out the public’s speech and refuse to publish information which undermines their power and dissenting opinions.

b. Court Enforcement

Free Speech is not genuine when Courts refuse to uphold it. China claims to have free speech, but their courts uniformly fail to enforce it. In 2005 China leads the world in jailing journalists (34 in December. By comparison the US is jailing five (5) journalists – without charges). In China political dissenters are regularly tortured, some disappear and there is official censorship of reporting on those missing and killed.

c. Speech Infringement Deterrence

Beyond enforcement, there should be real penalties or substantive deterrence for those who interfere with free speech or free media. It is the difference between a shield and a sword. The US Constitution only protects free speech, but provides no penalties or deterrence for those who prevent it.

Far stronger are the California Constitution and US Civil Rights laws which allow penalties for those who interfere with your free speech.

2. Citizen Agenda Setting

a. Assertion of Citizen Agenda Setting

Very few governments allow people to act when politicians won’t. The United States does not yet have a process to allow citizens to vote on federal laws or put laws up for a vote. (Its even worse than that. In 2002 – 2006 the Republicans controlled both houses of Congress and wholly refused to allow any Democrat written legislation to be voted on – by Congress!) However there is an NGO, an organization called Direct Democracy working to allow citizen legislation to be voted on nationally.

On the other hand, Oregon and California and twenty one other states specifically allow citizens to put laws up for a vote and allow voters to overturn laws passed by legislators. A majority, 27, of the 50 United States, do not allow it at all.

A Republic without an initiative process is not a Democracy. A Republic removes direct power over lawmaking and enforcement from the public and employs “elected” officials to make governmental decisions. The elected are almost always those with no other leadership qualifications than being the “lesser of two evils” who can raise the most campaign money.

Even though there are complaints about the Initiative process, it is notable that more than 90 percent of California’s voters would not give it up. They do not want Elected officials screwing around with our rights to put an issue on the ballot.

There is no federal initiative process in the United States and twenty seven (27) of the 50 US states do not have an initiative process.

b. Reasonably Available to Citizens

While California makes Initiatives and Referendums available at the state and local levels, and while many issues do get to the ballot – the large number of signatures (more than half a million as of 2005) and the short deadlines (150 days) make it too difficult and expensive for citizens to do so. At the same time it is too easy for wealthy non-citizens (corporations) to hire people to put an issues on the ballot. All a corporation needs is $2 million and one firm guarantees ballot placement.

c. Court Enforcement

Do Courts enforce citizen’s demands a law be put up for a popular vote? More than a few Courts have refused to uphold initiative and referendum laws.

d. Only voters can overturn voter made laws.

Of the 23 states with an Initiative process, only in California is a voter created law safe from hostile legislators. When voters make a law in California, elected officials cannot rescind or weaken it. Voter created law can only be overturned by the voters themselves. In areas without this protection, public officials have overturned citizen-made laws in a matter of days – or hours.

3. Everyone votes

Fair, Open Election and Ballot Counting.

You can examine a commitment to allowing everyone to vote by studying how minorities are treated as voters.

Although Pitcairn Island “let” women vote in 1837, the first country to allow women to vote was New Zealand in 1893. Women did not get to vote in the U.S. until 1920. It was illegal for Martha Washington, Betsy Ross and Mary Lincoln to vote.

As recently as 1960, black people in the Southern U.S. were frequently threatened with murder and sometimes shot if they went to a voting place or if they tried to register to vote. Oddly, and little known, the US Constitution has no federal right to vote, nor does it require any state to allow voting; voting is a state-granted privilege.

Some countries still don’t allow people to vote if they are of the “wrong” color, race, religion, social status (wrong side of the tracks) or if they can’t afford to pay a voting fee. Switzerland still has a political party purely dedicated to keeping women from voting in national elections. The US Civil Rights Commission examined Florida’s 2000 Presidential ballots and found 53 percent of invalidated votes were cast by black voters. Only 12 percent of the electorate is black. They found a black citizen was 10 times as likely to have a vote rejected as a white voter. Unfortunately, Florida was not an aberration. A U.S. Civil Rights Commissioner found Florida to be typical of conditions across the U.S. (See www.gregpalast.com)

a. All people can vote, and only people can vote. Corporations and groups cannot vote; a land owner has no more votes than another person.

b. Ballots counted in public.

Voting is worthless if you cannot watch the ballot counting. Opening and counting ballots in secret is an easy way to change election results. As recently as 1980, newspaper reporters were prohibited from video taping vote counting in Florida (Votescam, by James and Kenneth Collier). Startlingly, the national Sierra Club prohibits anyone – even candidates for their Director’s seats, from observing their own ballot opening and counting.

Ballots must have an accountable paper trail that can be examined in public – for free. In some areas ballots are placed in a locked glass box so everyone can see the box is empty (not stuffed with bogus votes) when balloting begins.

c. Citizen’s votes must be secret and cost nothing.

Making an individual citizen’s choice of vote public can intimidate them from voting their true desire. In extreme cases allowing others to learn how you vote can put your life at risk.

Charging someone to register or vote called a “Poll tax” can keep poor people from voting. Several southern (U.S.) states had poll taxes until the 1960’s.

d. Judicial System where election complaints are decided fairly.

This should be self-evident, however the U.S. Supreme Court 2000 Bush v Gore decision is an example of the highest court failing to follow or uphold the rule of law.

e. More Votes mean Victory. While this seems obvious, the US Electoral College system has prevented the candidate with the most votes from winning the election.

4. Money and Fear are Severed from Governmental Decisions

a. No one who benefits from a decision made by a government official may give money, or anything else, exceeding the value of their benefit — to that government official – before, during or after the official holds office.

Bribery occurs when someone gives something of value for a political decision. It could be a gift, a promise of a future job, a job to a relative, a campaign contribution or simply cash.

Examples abound: In 2005 Jack Abramoff admitted bribing Congressmen. Separately, in 2006 California Congressman Duke Cunningham pled guilty to receiving millions in bribes. Congressman James Traficant was found guilty of 10 felony counts including bribery in 2002. In 2006 Congressman Bob Ney pled guilty to charges of conspiracy and making false statements in relation to the Jack Abramoff Indian lobbying scandal.

California law fails on this count because while it has limits on gifts – it explicitly allows elected officials to vote and influence a project that exclusively financially benefits a campaign contributor. (Political Reform Act section 82030 b1). A small California town, Pacific Grove, took a leadership role in 2006 by adopting what may be the strongest anti-bribery (Conflict of Financial Interest / Campaign Finance Reform) law in the US.

b. No one may threaten a government official personally

A threat to an ordinary individual could harm their family, their friends and their work. However, a personal threat (blackmail or extortion) to a government official could affect a decision they make which could harm the lives of millions. Yet very few laws consider a personal threat (as opposed to a political threat, e.g. opposing their candidacy, potential recall) to a government official any differently than the same threat to an ordinary citizen.

5. Encouragement or Hostility

Finally, there is one criteria which trumps them all, yet cannot be quantitatively measured – Encouragement or Hostility?

Is your government hostile to public participation or does it encourage the public to participate?

Lets apply these four bare minimum criteria and compare some well known versions of governance. The grades are my judgment from decades of watching politics. (“USA” stands for the U.S. of America, “CA” means California)

1. Free Speech and Media Fully Enforced by Courts

a. Assertion of Free Speech
US = A-
CA= A+

b. Court Enforcement
US = A
CA= A

c. Speech Infringement Deterrence
US = D
CA= A

Summary
USA = B-
CA= A

While the US Supreme Court consistently upholds most free speech, the US Constitution has no provision for real penalties or substantive deterrence for those who interfere with free speech or free media (called self executing rights). Further, the US Constitution allows you to sign away your right to free speech to an employer.

California rights are self-executing with real penalties or substantive deterrence for those who interfere with free speech or free media, and its courts generally uphold them. However, California ignores all its authority over broadcast and cable media allowing media monopolies to drown out alternative voices.

2. Citizen Agenda Setting

a. Assertion of Citizen Agenda Setting
US = F (None, except for a Constitutional Convention)
CA= A

b. Reasonably Available to Citizens
US = F
CA= D

c. Court Enforcement
US = F
CA= A-

d. Only voters can overturn voter made laws.
US = F
CA= A

Summary
USA = F.
CA= B.

California has an Initiative process that cannot be overturned by lawmakers, has real penalties or substantive deterrence for those who interfere with free speech or free media, its courts generally abide by the law, and it does have its ballots opened and counted in public.

3. Everyone votes

a. Only people can vote. Corporations, groups or other government agencies cannot vote; land owners have no more vote than other people.
US = B. Supreme Court, not voters, decided Bush v Gore
CA= A-

b. Citizen’s votes must be secret and cost nothing.
US = A-
CA= A

c. Ballots counted in public.
US = F. Florida and Ohio documented in “VoteScam” in 1990
CA= B. Ballots cast for President in many states besides Florida are opened and counted in secret.
California ballots are almost always opened and counted in public.

d. Judicial System where election complaints are decided according to rule of law
US = F
CA= A

Summary
USA = F+, Because the Supreme Court overrode Voters and the Electoral College
CA= A

4. Money and Fear Severed from Governmental Decisions

a. Money must not affect a government official’s decision. (No one who benefits from a decision made by a government official may give money, or anything else, exceeding the value of their benefit — to that government official – before, during or after the official holds office.)
US = D-
CA= C

b. No one may threaten (or bribe) a government official personally
US = B-
CA= B-

Summary
USA = D+
CA= C

Remember a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. So the best grade a democracy can get is its weakest link.

Overall Grade
USA = (B-, F, F+, D+) = F
CA= (A, B, A, C) = C

The US of A gets an “F”, and California gets a “C” for Democracy.

The US would get a higher grade if five people on the Supreme Court had not failed their sworn duty in Bush v. Gore. However, it also needs to fix the lack of an Initiative or Referendum process.

So now you know more details about what it takes to have a genuine democracy. Consider taking inventory of your own local or state government, or your membership organization, to see how it measures up to the criteria explained here.

Encouragement vs Hostility

A genuine democracy encourages public participation and improvements to it. An Anti-democracy is hostile to public participation. As an example, many California towns and Counties have an unwritten (and illegal) policy of refusing to allow inspection of public records. Some agencies regularly try to take action to reduce and minimize public comment at public meetings.

When I learn of a government agency which encourages public participation and improvements to it, I will update this article.

References:
List of American federal politicians convicted of crimes

List of American state and local politicians convicted of crimes

Chicago Judge Found Guilty of Bribe Counts

Federal Judge Found Guilty of Taking Bribes

Expose Corrupt Courts

Zogby Poll Finds Overwhelming Voter Support for Reform And Federal Involvement in Elections

Official Secrets Act: Sinister threat to the public’s right to know