What i envision is a pbs/c-span federally funded station which would provide debate leading up to a vote of the people directly, on every bill or issue, on that station in plain language (no lawyer jargon) would be the issue to be voted on , on vote day each american would call an 800 # and press 1 for yes 2 for no , being identified by their voter card number , if card is ever lost or stolen, the # would be discontinued and a new card issued.the vote period would be 24 hours, on that station would be an ongoing tally of the results,one could also vote by computer.at that point you can either remove the house of representatives , as they are no longer needed, or keep them and require they vote formally the way thier district voted. the peoples voice must be heard and be an integral part of decision making , not just some afterthought by the pollsters.

Reply from the DDC:

Hello Scott,

Thank you for your suggestion on direct democracy. What you envision is exactly what it is all about.

If you haven't done so, please take a look at our proposed direct democracy amendment and give us some feedback on how to improve it. Also, it would help if people would call c-span and write letters to editor about direct democracy.

You would be surprised how much opposition to direct democracy there is from both sides of the political spectrum, liberal and conservative. Those powers entrenched in the two-party system and the education establishment don't want the people telling them what to do. Personal and party power is everything to them and they won't give it up easily. So, they always use the worn-out argument that we the people are too ignorant and unsophisticated to govern ourselves. If so, that is simply because the social, political, academic and economic "power-elite" have always made it their business to keep voters ignorant, fearful, unsophisticated, frustrated and confused. Plus, they know and fear the power of the people, so they call it the tyranny of the majority, mob rule or mobaucracy. But that's just not true. It's just a scare tactic. Indeed, the "power-elite" know all to well that truthfully and fully informed voters could and would govern themselves and take their power away from them.

Thanks again for your interest.

Regards,

Daniel B. Jeffs, founder
The Direct Democracy Center

Response from Scott Kay:

Okay jeffs, i looked at it and a couple things stood out to me 1 in section 1 the word representative is used alot, making it unclear whether we would dissolve the house of representatives and replace with direct voting (which i favor) or keep them on and require they vote whichever way thier district voted electronically. i would keep the senate intact , but require that each member be a minimum 40 years of age(wisdom) , the founding fathers wanted the gov't to be three parts ,president , senate & house of representatives , i believe they would have had direct voting through the house if they had mass communication at the time, but they didn't so representatives had to be employed.the reason for the 3 parts is for checks and balances , and i believe that must be maintained. the mass body of the electorate can sometimes be heavily swayed by powerful emotion sometimes not for the wiser , therefore you must have an older wiser senate there to keep that in check if it happens, those elected officials cannot be under constant threat of impeachment , i would support shortening thier terms but not constant election threat.section 5 : election and term of president ,definately get rid of the electoral college , a vote in rhode island should be just as important as a vote in california if we are indeed united states. the presidents term should remain the same for 1 basic reason, it takes a long time for a president to establish a good cabinet and get things up and running smoothly for the betterment of the people , however with this system in place it certainly would be much easier for the people to impeach a president ,by direct vote ,but it would have to be brought up for realistic impeachable offenses not just that we don't like the job he's doing or the way things are going.everything else looks good so far to me , but i did not go over it with a magnifying glass, once again always keep things in plain language and keep the lawyer jargon out so the average person can make a well informed decision...

Thanks for your response ...scott