<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:"Courier New";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal>Democracy is difficult to define. The Greeks
(Aristotle) simple defined democracy as “Rule by the Many”.
The question is what does “Rule” and “Many” mean.
This definition defines “Rule” as political power (control) and
“Many” as all the people (members/citizens). Most people
would thus define democracy as a system of government where all of the
political power (control) is in the hands of the people (citizens/members),
where each member of the public has equal power, and where they have a right to
exercise their power (voting/etc.). Let us call this a minimum
requirement for a democracy. If a governmental body does not have these
three minimum requirements then we can say they are not a
democracy. There are some definitions of democracy that would make
a democracy work better but are not the fundamental requirements. One of
these is to have the basic governmental functions separated. You could
also state that a county needs a “Bill of Rights” as the minimum
requirements to be a democracy. You could list 100 requirements that are
necessary to be a democracy and list the same number of definitions of
democracy. We need to ask, could we have a democratic government that has
only the three basic factors of democracy defined above. We need to stop
looking at a democratic county (US, etc.) and say that if another county does
not have all of their governmental features then they are not a democracy. <o:p></o:p></p>
<pre><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> PRACTICAL DEMOCRACY<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> (Selecting leaders FROM the people)<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> FOUNDATION<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> To select better leaders, we must select the most principled of our <o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> people as our representatives. The method must be democratic (i.e., <o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> allow the entire electorate to participate), egalitarian (i.e., give <o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> everyone an equal chance to participate), and it must be in harmony with natural human responses.<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<p class=MsoNormal>
Fred Gohlke<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Fred Gohlke states that a democracy must “give
everyone an equal chance to participate”. That is everyone as a right to
be considered for a governmental office. That does not mean that everyone
should have an equal chance to be selected. You could say that
everyone should have the right to submit an application for the governmental
job and each applicant needs to be considered fairly and equally.
In a democracy it is the responsibility of the selecting official (the
people/voters) to decide who is best qualified for the job.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>In a true direct democracy the people must make
“all” the decisions. Thus they make the laws and implement
those laws. This type of government may work of a homeowners association
of very small city but not for a large government entity
(city/state/country). What people can do to make a workable government is
delegate some of their powers. The people can delegate their power to
someone to help them make laws and run the government. This could be
called a “delegated democracy”. If we delegate this power to
someone are you are giving up our power? One thing the people could do is
to vote for one person (a manager) to make the laws and run the
government. If the people do not like how the manager is running the
government they can fire the manager at any time. The people are always in
control at all times and can exercise (voting) their control at any time and
thus this type of government can still be called a democracy. If
the manager is elected for a term of four years (with no recall provision) then
there is no democracy for those four years. They could vote in a
“King for life” but by doing this they are in-effect voting
democracy out of existence (or at least until the King dies). Why,
because the people no longer have any power nor do they have the right to
exercise that power (voting). The King is really a dictator, because he
has the absolute power.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>In most government systems the people are willing to give up
some control in the name of efficiency and stability. Most people do not
have the expertise to make good laws so they hire individuals who do have that
expertise. If you want your car repaired you hire a mechanic.
But you do have the right to select your mechanic. It would also be very
costly to have presidential elections weekly/monthly/or even annually.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>The people also could elect representatives who in turn
would select the person the run the government (manager/president).
Many cities in the US have what is called a city manager type of government.
They elect a city council and they in turn select a city manager. This
type of government is called a “representative democracy”. This is
not a true democracy by our definition above because the people do not have any
say in the selection (power to select) or any control after the
selection. If the people do not like the decisions of the city manage makes,
what are their options? They cannot remove the city manager thus the
people have lost control of the government (the city). Let us assume that
we can recall our city council member. The people do still have control
over their city council members (their representative) and thus have some
power. By selecting a new council member there is no guarantee that the
“bad” (not representing the views of the people) city manager well
be replaced. This type of governmental system is similar to a parliament type
democracy and trades off democracy for efficiency and stability.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>The President of the US is elected by the people (well
almost) and not by the congress. Thus this system of government is a
little more democratic than a parliamentary form because the people have more
control in the selection of their President. Once elected for a four year
period however the public as lost all of their control and thus the government
system is no longer a true democracy, at least for the next four years.
They cannot recall a sitting President for four years. Congress can
remove a President but only on “impeachable offences” and not for
incompetence or for not following the wishes of the people.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>You may say that the people do not elect the President; the
Electoral College elects the President. This system could be called
“democracy by proxy” and is a form of democracy where you give up
your power to someone else who in turn pledges (by contract or law) to
vote for the person you voted for (or in this case the person your state voted
for). The voters are still in control of the selection. There is
however the problem of equal power in that a voter in a small state has more
voting power than a voter in a large state. If the system had equal
voting power and proportional state voting this proxy type voting could be
labeled as a true democracy. This voting system is done in the corporate
world of stocks all the time. In a stock voting world a stock holder can
give their proxy to someone who in turn votes for you. Because a voter in
this type of presidential election process has more control over the selection
of head of the government it tends to be more democratic than the centralized
parliamentary type of democracy. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Fred presented an interesting election method (Triad method).
The question is it consistent with the definition of democracy. <o:p></o:p></p>
<pre><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> Re: METHOD<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> 1) Divide the electorate into triads, groups of three people.<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> 2) Assign a date and time by which each triad must select<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> one of the three members to represent the other two.<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> a. No participant may vote for himself.<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> b. If a triad is unable to select a representative in the<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> specified time, the triad is disqualified.<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> 3) Divide the participants so selected into new triads.<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> 4) Repeat from step 2 until a target number of selections is<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> reached. The target number will be the number of local <o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> offices to be filled and the community's candidates for<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> county, state and national elective offices.<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:.5in'>Fred Gohlke<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Let us look at one citizen. A retired worker 75 year
old who has put in his time and is not interested in being the city
manager. He would thus not want the other two to vote for him. By
not being selected to advance to the second round he has lost his right to
vote. He no longer has any say in the selection of the city
manager. You may say that it is his right not to seek the job. But,
in a democracy it is his right, and the right of “all” citizens to
select their leader. Thus the Triad method violates one of the most
fundamental principles of democracy. Another citizen making $200k and the
job pay $50 would also decide not to seek the job and would thus lose their
right to vote (in later rounds). And finally, a citizen who cannot
read or write would also lose their voting rights. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>You could change the Triad method to say that the final 9
would decide who would get the job and not require that you select only from
the final 9. In this way our three citizens could have a chance to be
part of the final 9. It does not make the method consistent with our
democratic principles but it is closer.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Another problem with the Triad method is that the best
person (the one that would be selected by all of the citizens) for the job may
be eliminated on the first round by two men who don’t like the third
persons looks or they thinks she is too liberal (or too conservative).
Also the best person could also be eliminated because someone on her Triad
didn’t show up.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Most cities (and government entities) allow anyone seeking a
political office to get X number of signatures and get on the ballot. If
the person can’t get the required number of signatures then they are, in
all likely hood not the best person (determined by the voters) for the job any
why. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Fred’s concept of equal opportunity is important. We
do need to find the best way that allows all those seeking an elected position
an opportunity to apply and to be considered fairly and equally. But we
should try to do it in a way the preserves the fundamental principles of democracy.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Don Hoffard<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>