Is There a Way Out?

Column 2018-9 (12/10/18)

In recent columns I have explored the strife and destruction that results when ever expanding, intrusive government interferes with more and more of the personal choices made by individuals. Even temporary majorities of legislators impose the choices of some on everyone. Once a law is passed it is all but impossible to repeal it, no matter how silly or destructive it is.

Can the seemingly endless growth of strife and destruction be contained and rolled back before the US ends up in the same pit Venezuela wallows in today? A look at history isn’t encouraging. The halls of history are littered with the carcases of nations destroyed by excessive government.

Majority rule democracy encourages voters to exploit and control each other. No where is it written that democracy demands that a mere majority must be allowed to unleash the force and violence of government against everyone. Florida already requires a 60 percent super majority to amend its constitution. In the last election Florida enacted the requirement that taxes be approved by a 60 percent super majority.

There is no reason why a super majority shouldn’t be required to pass every law. There are many reasons why it should be required. It is beyond the scope of a mere column to consider how large the super majority should be. A two thirds super majority would be good for starting consideration. This is the margin commonly required to over ride a veto.

Allowing a mere majority to unleash the force of government against an almost equally large minority is absurd. It is also a formula for strife and disaster. Why shouldn’t the proponent of any law be required to convince more than a mere majority that the law is necessary?

Requiring super majority approval won’t guarantee that all laws will be wise and wonderful. It will reduce the number of laws that allow some to impose their wills on others. This will dial down the strife we now see raging around us.

We have 200 thousand pages of federal laws and regulations, and who knows how many pages of state and local laws. It is too late to save civilization by merely making it more difficult to make new laws. Requiring a super majority to repeal laws would add to our problem, rather than solving it. Also, only requiring super majority approval for new laws would be too little too late.

I will briefly outline a plan that could work. I am not under the illusion that it will be easy to enact. No doubt there will be a few wrinkles to work out. Such as, how to deal with judges who believe they are legislators.

The starting point is that all laws would require super majority approval. All existing laws could be put to a vote for reapproval. Reapproval would be initiated by a petition signed by a percentage, perhaps 30 percent, of the members of the legislative body. If the law failed to get super majority approval it would be repealed. This would prevent the dead hand of past lawmakers from ruling the present. A similar procedure would apply to laws subject to popular vote.

Even if requiring super majority approval of all laws only postpones an inevitable doom, at least it would have accomplished more than doing nothing. With at least some voters now willing to reject the principal of “a simple majority should rule everyone,” the time may be right to remove the fatal flaw from democracy.

* * * * *

* * * *

* * *

* *

*

Copyright 2018

Albert D. McCallum