Direct Democracy and Debt
- Barry Poulson
- 5 days ago
- 3 min read
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right of citizens to “petition the Government for a redress of grievances”. When citizens use the petition process, they are exercising the freedom of speech guaranteed in the First Amendment. The Founders viewed freedom of speech as essential to hold the government accountable. George Washington expressed this sentiment “If men are to be precluded from offering their sentiments… the freedom of speech may be taken away __and, dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
The Founders also intended that citizens should have the final say in amending the Constitution. James Madison expressed this in Federalist 49. “(a)s the people are the only legitimate fountain of power, and it is from them that the constitutional charter, under which the several branches of government hold their power, is derived, it seems strictly consonant to the Republican theory to recur to the same original authority …whenever it may be necessary to enlarge, diminish, or new-model the powers of government.”
Direct democracy has played a major role in shaping the U.S. Constitution. However, citizens have not been successful in proposing amendments to the Constitution as envisioned by the Founders. Article V gives citizens equal power with Congress to propose amendments through their states; but Congress has preempted that power by proposing its own amendments, and in some cases, such as the fiscal responsibility amendment, Congress has blocked efforts by citizens to propose amendments through their state governments.
This study explores the role of direct democracy in shaping the U.S. Constitution and especially in passage of the fiscal responsibility amendment. A brief history traces how the petition process has been used to enact amendments to the Constitution.
A discussion of Article V reveals how Congress has blocked efforts by citizens to propose a fiscal responsibility amendment. Congress has failed to address the debt crisis and has ignored the issue by inaction thereby attempting to block citizens from using Article V to propose the fiscal responsibility amendment. This has in fact created a constitutional crisis.
At the state level citizens have been using direct democracy to enact more effective fiscal rules since the tax revolt in the 1970s. California’s Proposition 13 was citizen-drafted and placed on the ballot through a volunteer petition drive collecting an estimated 1.5 million signatures. Prop 13’s property tax cap and 1% rate limit passed by 65%. The most effective of these fiscal rules, however, is Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR), a volunteer-petition initiative approved in 1992 by 54% of the voters.
This study explores how a Federal Taxpayer Bill of Rights could be enacted to impose effective fiscal rules on the federal government. The precedent is Switzerland’s Debt Brake, enacted through referendum and introduced in 2003.
This paper makes the case for citizens to use direct democracy to enact a Federal Taxpayer Bill of Rights, bypassing Congress. Passage of a Federal Taxpayer Bill of Rights could set the stage for other amendments proposed by citizens, launching a new era of direct democracy. This is what the Founders intended when they gave citizens through their states equal power with Congress to amend the U.S. Constitution. We are at a crucial turning point when failure of Congress to address the debt crisis threatens the prosperity of the country, and especially the prospects for future generations who will foot the bill for Congressional profligacy.
The full whitepaper is available below:
