Chapter 10-I-g
Citizen Approval


A requirement for citizen approval of all legislation passed would be an even stronger measure than a veto to keep power more firmly rooted at the bottom of the hierarchy, among The People. Rather than citizen-members having the option to cast a veto-vote, they could have the option of simply voting for, or against, all ‘major’ legislation, with a majority vote of The People, at the relevant District, State, or National level, required for any legislation passed by a Congress at that level to 'take effect'.

In our own considerations, we think that a citizen’s veto is a better idea. We think that requiring citizen approval places more demands on the time and attention of the citizen-members, requiring them, in effect, to be the Congresses themselves. The Congresses would be reduced to being bodies whose only effective function would be to introduce legislation to be considered by The People.

This is an magnetically alluring idea, however, and it must be given careful consideration. It is certainly a function that the power of digital communications technology could facilitate. We would need to make a careful assessment of such a provision’s possible unintended consequences. Our initial concern is that if all issues before all Congresses at every level require review by the citizen-members, the citizen-members will be inundated with the burdens of decision-making to a degree well beyond their desire or ability to find time to undertake, and as a result, many decisions will be made by people who are inadequately informed.

The time it would take for every citizen-member to adequately inform themselves on every issue, at every level, may very well be unrealistic to expect. This would largely negate the organizational and communications advantages of a layered representational hierarchy. It is inevitable that many votes would be cast according to preconceived biases, rather than as a result of analysis and reason, by people who are poorly informed, or even misinformed, as to the merits of any issue. A veto option gives The People the ability to organize and mount opposition concerning controversial issues of major interest and import. Requiring citizen-member approval saddles them with the burden of a workload that few might be willing to undertake.

However alluring the idea of Citizen Approval may be, we must consider the effects it would have in relation to the general cohesion and overall dynamics of the organization. This relates to the discussion of the Paradox of Democratic Autonomy, as discussed in Chapter 5c. Too much autonomy at either end of a democratic hierarchy degrades democratic organizational cohesion. Too much at the top produces an authoritarian bureaucracy, and that is very easy to see. But too much at the bottom can produce an excess of autonomy that negates the basic benefits of organizing at all. A dialectic balance must be found.

A proper consideration of these factors will require a longer and more complex discussion than is suitable to take up here. Issues like these will be need to be decided by those who write and ratify the organization’s constitution.


Previous Page..........................................Table of Contents..........................................Next Page