Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site psivax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen
From: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.legal
Subject: Re: On Democracy: A Plan to Implement a Practical Modern Democracy
Message-ID: <1050@psivax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 5-Mar-86 16:07:57 EST
Article-I.D.: psivax.1050
Posted: Wed Mar  5 16:07:57 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 8-Mar-86 02:33:53 EST
References: <689@sftig.UUCP> <357@isis.UUCP>
Reply-To: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Distribution: net
Organization: Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA
Lines: 76
Xref: watmath net.politics:13736 net.legal:3051

In article <357@isis.UUCP> jay@isis.UUCP (Jay) writes:
>
>In <689@sftig.UUCP>, jmg@sftig.UUCP (J.McGhee) writes several things I must
>pick a bone with:
>
>> Judiciary Branch:
>> 
>> 	This branch could remain essentially as it is, except that all federal
>> judges and all members of the Supreme Court would be directly elected by the
>> people.
>
>	Certainly.  And soon, we have judges making decisions in a manner which
>will assure their re-election, and not in a manner which at least "attempts"
>to balance equities in each case.  That is a wonderful improvement!  We
>end up with a body that we call "Congress, Mark II".  The point of an unelected
>judiciary is to have at least one body of our tripartite government FREE from
>the political expediency that so plagues the decisions of the remaining two
>branches.

	Actually, the method of choosing judges is the trickiest
problem in government. Even appointment by the executive is not a real
gaurentee of independence. Often the prospective judge must make
promises to get appointed. This constitutes a form of prejudice in
trying certain cases. So, anyone have any suggestions? How do we
choose judges so that they have no obligation to *anyone* and have no
pressure to "do the popular thing", so that they can be totally
impartial when sitting on cases? And how do we weed out bad judges
who make decisions based on personal expedience? The current federal
approach is one of the best I know of. Can anyone come up with
something that is really better.
>
>> Legislative Branch:
>> 
>> 	The present structure of Congress could remain, but members of Congress
>> would have no voting power other than as an ordinary citizens...
>> ... Eventually the Congressmen would
>> mostly function as advocates of various bills which they would explain and
>> argue for in the national communications media...
>> ... They would also occupy themselves with drawing up legislation
>> requested by various groups among their constituents who petition for a certain
>> type of bill to be composed.
>
>	Ok.  Now we get to the basic fallacy in your argument.
> Ask yourself just how "fully >informed" you think the electorate is.
> Have you ever taken the time
>YOURSELF to go check out the text of a bill, and fully investigate the pros
>and cons of that bill?  AND THEN DONE IT FOR EVERY BILL SUBMITTED!?!
>Probably not.  And you are an activist!  Just think of the hordes of people
>out there who "don't get involved in politics much", other than try to
>figure out once every couple of years who "stands" for what.
>  And you want these (read "uninformed, uninterested, ...") people to
>shape our country's future???????  REALLY????? 
>
>	(Hear the bomb explode).  The people already have lawmaking powers
>indirectly, and not to disparage the intelligence of the american people, I
>don't think any of us is in a position to do anything except designate which
>of us is going to be responsible for getting all the facts, and choosing the
>best course.  We as an electorate don't have sufficient time to do the work
>it would take to make sufficiently informed decisions.

	Absolutely. I generally spend more time finding out about the
issues than most people I know, yet I constantly find myself voting on
matters I only half understand. I know how much time it would take to
achieve even this small level of understanding for every issue raised
in running our country and all of its various parts. I do not have
that much spare time, it is impossible. I much prefer having someone
else represent me who *has* the time because I am paying to have it.
This man is my congressman. The real job in improving American
representative democracy is how to better gaurentee that a competent
and responsible man get the job of representative.
-- 

				Sarima (Stanley Friesen)

UUCP: {ttidca|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|quad1|nrcvax|bellcore|logico}!psivax!friesen
ARPA: ttidca!psivax!friesen@rand-unix.arpa