Next Generation Democracy: What the Open-Source Revolution Means for Power, Politics and Change

The challenges of the twenty-first century are of an unprecedented scale. Climate change, financial instability, the housing crisis, the need for health care—all of these are political issues that could be managed with ease if they were occurring on a much smaller scale. But with a huge global population and inextricable connections between the issues, our old tools for change look increasingly blunt. Many of the large bodies we once appointed to manage our common problems—including national governments— have begun to fail at critical moments.

But there is good news: We can use our vast size and complexity to our advantage. Drawing on the lessons of open source technology, social change leader Jared Duval offers an inspiring call to action. Next Generation Democracy chronicles some of the watershed events, such as Hurricane Katrina, during which centralized leadership was not enough, and then tells the success stories of the leaders, both inside the government and out, who are finding effective, directly democratic ways to address our public challenges. Telling the stories of participatory organizations such as SeeClickFix and America Speaks, Duval describes a new approach to solving complex problems that draws on the contributions of vast and diverse communities of engaged citizens. An artful blend of personal writing, journalism, and political argument, Next Generation Democracy not only gives us a vision of a brighter future, it inspires us to be apart of it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

What might be intermediate steps towards realizing a Citizen Legislature?

Advisory bodies of randomly chosen citizens already are becoming commonplace. The more these examples demonstrate the wisdom of ‘the people’, the sooner such bodies can graduate from advisers to policy makers.

See, among others, The Center for Deliberative Democracy, The Jefferson Center for New Democratic Processes, Citizen Consensus Councils, National Issues Forum, The National Initiative for Democracy, Everyday Democracy, Public Agenda, International Association for Public Participation, National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation, America Speaks and the Deliberative Democracy Consortium.

For bicameral legislatures some thinkers propose replacing the upper chamber with an allotted one and keeping the lower elected chamber.
In the U.S. Congress the Senate would be replaced by a sortitionally-chosen Citizens Chamber. Current procedural rules would remain as they are. [It is worth noting that under present U.S. Senate rules of filibuster, 40 Senators representing less than 10% of the population can block legislation.]
It is assumed that the Citizens Chamber would prove its worth over time and would likely stimulate demand for a unicameral Citizens Legislature.

Posted in FAQs - Frequently Asked Questions | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

What might be some long-term effects of a Citizen Legislature?

Over time more and more individuals in more and more segments of the population will have had the experience of attending to legislative business.
The likely effect of those many and evenly disbursed experiences would be a greater capacity for localities to handle their own affairs.
Thomas Jefferson’s vision might then be realized: “… our General Government may be reduced to a very simple organization, and a very inexpensive one; a few plain duties to be performed by a few servants.”

Another effect probably would be more attention to education in general and civic education in particular. Since qualifications to be included in the lottery for sortitional selection would low enough so as not to unduly disenfranchise any group — a test equivalent in difficulty to that required to obtain a driver’s license in the U.S. – it would be all the more reason to make sure that education was universal and of the highest standard. “After all, your neighbor could be in Congress!”

Since a Citizen Legislature would be proportionally representative, no one could say ‘I am not a part of it’. Everyone would have a truly equal chance of serving.
We would all of us ‘be in it together’ and it would be only as good as ‘we’ are.
For the first time in history, decision-making would be by a fully legitimate representative body.

Posted in FAQs - Frequently Asked Questions | Leave a comment

How can visionary leadership find a place in a Citizen Legislature?

Like every other measure, visionary leadership would be as prevalent in a proportionally representative legislature as it is in the general population. Some may criticize this fact by saying that this is exactly why we force candidates to engage in combative campaigns … so that voters can choose the ‘best’. Unfortunately what is chosen in that case is ‘the most combative’.

But more important than ‘visionary leadership’ among the legislators themselves is the fact that visionary leadership will be available, as it is now, from outside sources — from lobbyists, citizens, leaders of all stripes and other petitioners. The actual architects of most laws in current legislatures are rarely the elected congresspersons but instead their staff and their various committees of advisors. The Senators and Reps are simply the deciders who make the choices among all the options presented. Quite rarely is leadership coupled with electability, which is the precise point of sortition — to remove the influence of money, influence-peddling and power-brokering from the process by which our leaders are selected.

Posted in FAQs - Frequently Asked Questions | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

How does the median U.S. household net worth compare to that of Congress?

The median net worth of Senators is $1.06 million.

Representatives about $366,000.

The median net worth of U.S. households about $120,000.

N.B. ‘Median’ means ‘in the middle’.
It is different than ‘average’. The average is the total divided by the number of entries.

For example, take five people with these incomes:
A = $10,000
B = $20,000
C = $30,000
D = $40,000
E = $900,000

The median would be $30,000 (C, in the middle).

But the average would be $200,000 (A+B+C+D+E=$1,000,000 divided by five people = $200,000)

Posted in FAQs - Frequently Asked Questions | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The base annual salary for Senators and Representatives in 2010 is $174,000. In addition there are retirement and health benefits, expense allowances, franking privilege, personal staff allowance and other perquisites.

The 2010 median household income in the United States is $49,777.

Since a proportionally representative Citizen Legislature would contain half above and half below the median income, the representatives might want to peg the salary to a certain percentage of that median.

[In The Common Lot: Next Step for Democracy it is proposed that the salary be exactly the national median. Upon further reflection however, considering the considerable dislocation required and effort demanded, perhaps the national median plus 50% would be appropriate and adequate.]

In any case, this would be a matter for considered debate, as it always is and will remain.

Posted on by Common Lot Sortitionist | Leave a comment

Why not have all citizens vote for or against legislation? Online for instance?

Even if everyone had internet access or some other way to register their opinion, there are several problems with everyone voting on everything.

Most people do not have time or interest to properly deliberate about complex social issues.

Plebiscites, referenda and polls about complicated matters mostly reflect the opinions of the uninformed.

Demagogues can easily manipulate uninformed masses with emotional but untrue appeals.

Posted in FAQs - Frequently Asked Questions | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Would it take a constitutional amendment to change the selection process of Congress from balloting to sortition?

The First Article, Section Four, of the US Constitution says:

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof

That seems clear a state can choose whatever ‘manner’ it wishes to hold an election.
Of course the law is always open to interpretation. But it seems that constitutionally a lottery would be allowed.

Several states do already mandate a flip of the coin to settle tied local elections.

Posted in FAQs - Frequently Asked Questions | Tagged | Leave a comment

What are some reasons against sortitional selection of decision-making bodies?

These issues have been raised:

  1. Fear of incompetence
  2. Loss of institutional memory
  3. Tyranny of the majority
  4. Lack of accountability
  5. The seeming end of constituencies
  6. Potential for corruption
  7. No coherent programs or platforms

Our responses to these are as follows:

  1. Agreed, that a basic understanding of civics is required. Therefore the proposal calls for a qualifying written test (no more difficult than that for a driver’s license in the USA). Both driving and serving on a jury involve life-and-death matters. With deliberative time assured and compensated the average citizen is quite capable of making wise decisions.
  2. In the case of an institution that includes all of us, institutional memory is the responsibility of us all. The Fourth Estate in all its forms plays an important role in assuring this.
  3. Since a sortitionally-chosen legislature would vote on the proposals initiated by or brought to it, majoritarianism will remain the danger to democracy that it has always been — just as identified by de Tocqueville. Besides the existing constitutional checks and balances of the judicial and executive branches, the fact that minorities will be proportionally represented within the legislative debates should assure that tyrannies of the majority (such as those of land theft, enslavement, restricted suffrage, blacklisting, etc.) would occur less frequently than they have.
  4. With a decision-making body most closely representing ‘all the people’ the issue of ‘lack of accountability’ is tautological. That is: how can ‘all the people’ not be accountable to itself?
  5. There will be constituencies, though not ones with the clout of political manipulation. There will be like-minded representatives who, by ‘being true to their own selves’, will represent many more ‘constituencies’ than at present … since the full panoply of personalities and ideologies will be represented.
  6. The great majority of the general populace is hard-working and honest. For the few who are not, the existing controls will be adequate (or found not to be, in which case improvements through existing mechanisms can be made).
  7. Sortition was first used to prevent factions – or more often in today’s parlance, ‘interests’ – from undue influence. Political parties would no longer control candidates or representatives. But they – and many other citizen groups – would propose programs and platforms. Citizen legislators would act as a jury, choosing the programs most beneficial to all.
Posted in FAQs - Frequently Asked Questions | Tagged | Leave a comment

What drives you to advocate for this? What personal interests in it do you have?

There are three separate but related impulses that drive me to push for a Citizen Legislature.

First is simply to engender more thought about what a ‘representative democracy’ is supposed to be. I thought it meant that the government was not supposed to be separate from the people.

Second is to eliminate my own lifelong complaint that no one in any elected ‘representative body’ represents me … since none of them are people who would not run for election. My whole life I have ‘stood outside’, disassociating myself from what I can only deem to be systematically an illegitimate government.

Third is to hasten the emergent, evolutionary social drive towards … not ‘equitability’ but … inclusivity. The sooner ‘we-are-all-in-this-together’ is operationally realized, the better off we all will be.

Posted in FAQs - Frequently Asked Questions | Tagged | Leave a comment