Dave Hinz (in ) said:

| On Mon, 8 Aug 2005 15:00:59 -0500, Morris Dovey
| wrote:

|| Another that's impressed me is the Swiss approach which, if I
|| understood correctly, requires that all new legislation pass a
|| popular referendum. That's not to say that the general populace is
|| necessarily wiser than the legislature; but it does give ordinary
|| citizens the final say. I like that - and would be interested in
|| comments by Swiss woodworkers...
|
| The problem is, we can barely get half the people off their asses to
| vote for _president_ once every four years. Not saying it's a bad
| idea, just that as with anything else, a small percentage of the
| population would be making the decisions. And, really, would _you_
| vote on every piece of legislation, or just the few that you
| know/care about?

*Very* worthwhile question! Let's require a majority of registered
voters in favor of a proposition for passage. Still better, let's also
provide the opportunity to vote "no"; and if a 1/3 minority of
participating voters says "no", then the proposition fails.

And you're right, I almost certainly would only vote on the issues
that I knew of and cared about. I like the idea that if a politician
wants a particular piece of legislation passed, he/she needs to ensure
that the voters are properly informed and that the legislation is
subjected to a bit of sunshine before it *can* become law.

|| Another idea that I like is limiting the number of laws that can
|| be on the books at any time (I'd go for fewer than 100) so that,
|| once the limit is reached, no new law can be added without
|| repealing a less valued existing law.
|
| Great theory, I just don't know how it could be put into practice.
| Laws that are hundreds of pages long, though, are insane. "Here's
| the deal - don't do (thing) or (other thing) will happen".

I don't know, too. :-(

We could make a fair start with the golden rule. Hmm, could we codify
"What goes around comes around"? Heh, heh - It just ocurred to me that
legislators who overspend might end up automatically losing all
property and pension rights - betcha spending would be done with
/very/ much more care...

|| I think that I might also like to see a process by which laws
|| could be repealed by popular referendum once they're considered no
|| longer useful.
|
| Yes.
|
|| Agreed. Interesting that in all the time humans have been around we
|| haven't managed to produce and implement a fair and just solution
|| all can agree on. I don't think that means it /can't/ be done -
|| perhaps it just calls for a level of social maturity we haven't
|| yet reached. I'm pretty sure we shouldn't stop trying...
|
| It's an iterative process, to be sure. Cyclical, too.

Agreed. Progress does seem to come /so/ slowly.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html