"Direct democracy, Iraq, and 'horizontal' civil rights"
The Bev Smith Show (nationally syndicated)
October 28, 2002
Nationally syndicated radio host Bev Smith spoke to Gregory Fossedal,
the author of Direct Democracy in Switzerland, for one hour this evening.
The two held a spirited and wide-ranging talk that moved from civil
rights issues to the potential war in Iraq.
"Gregory Fossedal has written a thoughtful study on a country
that does democracy in a very distinctive way than the U.S., and I
would say, perhaps a better way," Smith said. "In the United
States, we like to think we are ahead of everybody in the world, that
we have the most perfect system possible -- but if you look at things
like Enron and the corporate greed dominating our Congress, or all
the shenanigans in places like Florida in the presidential election,
it's clear that we need to make some improvements of our own system.
I want to talk about that tonight -- about your very optimistic and
uplifting concept that we can continue to improve and perfect democracy
right here at home."
"It's no stain on the United States to say that our democracy,
though an excellent and improving system, isn't the ultimate, unimprovable
way to do things," Fossedal agreed. "In fact, my guess is,
we would project a little better image in the world, and also benefit
ourselves at home, if we had a little humility and said, maybe we
can give our system an upgrade, and maybe there are other countries
we could learn something from. I went to Switzerland to study their
system for that reason, and came away with a heightened respect for
the Swiss system and the Swiss citizen it has produced."
Smith asked if majority-rule decisions could be counted on to protect
the rights of minorities. Fossedal noted the connection between civil
rights and direct democracy in both Switzerland and the United States.
"In Switzerland, direct democracy has long been associated with
civil rights, with minority rights and the protection of civil federalism
on questions such as language and religion. In fact, even as anti-Semitism
was rising in Europe in the 19th and early 20th Century, Switzerland
passed a referendum encouraging Jewish immigration from France, protecting
the rights of Jews to practice their religion in the country. On the
eve of World War II, as Gestapo agents combed the country trying to
track Jewish funds flowing out of Germany, the Swiss approved a law
strengthening banking privacy. Protecting Jewish accounts from Germany
wasn't the only reason they took this action, but it was one of the
major considerations.
"In the United States, iniative, referenda, and constitutional
assemblies in the states were often the cause of protecting and extending
the right of women and African Americans to vote. In my home state
of Wisconsin, the right of blacks to vote, initially denied by representatives
at the state's constitutional assembly, was established by referendum.
This was true in a number of northern states prior to the Civil War.
And after the war, the thirteenth and fourteenth amendments to the
constitution were often approved much more rapidly in states where
the possibility of initiative and referendum acted as a prod to get
legislators off the dime. The women's rights movement was similarly
aided by the initiative and referendum process in the 20th Century.
"Today, one of the most important proposals in Congress on civil
rights, for internet voting, comes from Jesse Jackson Junior, a leading
voice on civil rights. But of course, Jackson's proposal wouldn't
just extend voting rights to any particular group, but to all voters."
"Let's talk about that," Smith said. "Let's talk about
civil rights from that broad perspective."
Fossedal commented: "From this perspctive, direct democracy itself
is an expansion of civil rights per se in a substantive sense. From
the 1950s to today, civil rights has established much higher levels
of participation by blacks and other minorities. People are now, by
and large, able to vote, whatever their skin color. Yet substantively,
they feel disenfranchised -- that their vote doesn't make a difference.
"Direct democracy is thus, in substantive terms, an expansion
of civil rights. The Civil Rights act established who may vote, but
it didn't expand what they may vote on. Direct democracy would extend
to all Americans the substantive right to make laws on their own,
and overturn bad laws from the Congress. It would thus be a great
expansion of voting rights.
"If you think of voting rights on a plane, with who may vote
being one axis and what they may vote on another, we've had
a great expansion on one dimension, on the vertical axis of who
may vote, since the early 20th Century. We've nearly tripled the
voter base, with the addition of women, blacks, and others
to white male property owners. But we've had little expansion on
the horizontal axis -- on the substance of what they may vote on.
Switzerland has had that expansion, which is one reason I say, Switzerland
enjoys a culture of civil rights that is stronger than the U.S. Yes,
someone in the world is even better than us."
Keith Sheets, AdTI
202 548 0006
ksheets@adti.net