Hansen, Lawrence N.

English

Research Papers in Economics

REPRESENTATIVE  DEMOCRACY:
MAKING IT WORK BETTER
Lawrence N.  Hansen
Roosevelt Center  for American Policy Studies
George Bernard Shaw once observed that "democracy  is the only
form of government  that gives  people what they deserve."  The  un-
folding  contest  between  Mr.  Bush and  Mr.  Dukakis is  a painful re-
minder of how right Shaw was. How,  and for what purposes,  the
nominees intend to wield the Presidency's  awesome  power and au-
thority is a mystery of enormous  magnitude.  In this campaign the
public  has been treated  to an  almost uninterrupted  diet  of ambigu-
ities,  simplicities,  evasions and negativism.
The  relative  impoverishment  of the current political debate  is not
cost-free.  Voter turnout this year may be the lowest in forty years
and the failure  of candidates  to lay  out their plans,  define their
priorities  and reveal the difficult  choices they are prepared  to make
before the election can only compound the difficulty  of governing the
nation effectively after the election.
Roosevelt  Center's Mission
These contemporary  concerns help explain the  Roosevelt Center's
mission.  The  Center's  overarching  purpose  is  to make  representa-
tive democracy  work  better.  On both  theoretical  and  practical
grounds,  we  believe  democracy  operates  at  its best  1) when  policy
makers have continuous access to a body of informed public opinion;
2)  when citizens'  ability to evaluate  critically the decisions of their
elected representatives  is enhanced; and  3) when there are more,
rather than fewer,  opportunities  for citizens  to discharge  their duty
to be both informed  and involved.
Since its founding  six years ago,  the Roosevelt Center,  which is
scrupulously nonpartisan and nonprescriptive  in its treatment of pol-
icy  issues,  has involved more than  100,000  people in its activities and
programs.  In its quest to increase informed  public  involvement  in
the nation's  political business, the Center has developed educational
materials  and organized  hundreds  of community-based  programs
designed  to:
87*  raise citizens'  awareness  of policy problems;
*  familiarize  them with the  history  and  structure  of those  prob-
lems;
*  lay out a full range of options for dealing with specific issues;
*  encourage  participants  to  form  reasoned  choices  from  among
the options;  and
*  close  the circle  by delivering  citizens' judgments  as effectively
as possible to appropriate policy makers.
The final objective deserves some elaboration.  While education  for
education's  sake  is  defensible,  informed  and  concerned  citizens
really  yearn for  a larger voice  in policy  decisions that affect  their
lives.
Connecting Citizens with Policy  Making
Experimenting  with  new  ways  of connecting  informed  citizens
more  effectively  with policy  making processes  at  all levels  is  a
Roosevelt  Center obsession and real  and steady progress  is being
made.
One evening two years ago representative  groups of citizens-a
thousand in all-met in fifty state capitals.  For several hours they
considered  and debated  some  forty  options  for reducing  the budget
deficit and for bringing the budget deficit  into compliance by 1991
with the requirements  of Gramm-Rudman-Hollings.  All but three
states met  the deficit  reduction  goal and a  national majority  agreed
on  a package  of program  cuts  and tax increases that would have
reduced  the  1991  deficit by $75 billion.  The next morning,  at private
briefings and a press conference  in the Capitol,  the results of this
"people's  budget"  were  unveiled.  Later that  day  the  center's  staff
briefed James Miller,  director of the Office of Management and Bud-
get.
Several  months  later the Center  launched  a massive  eighteen-
month  voter education  project  in five  states  to  raise the salience  of
policy issues  in  the  presidential  primary/caucus  campaign.  All told,
some 45,000 people  in Iowa,  New Hampshire,  North Carolina,  Geor-
gia and Illinois took part directly  in "U.S.  88:  A New  Road to the
White House."  Policy crash courses  (primers,  videotapes,  role-
playing exercises and options papers) on topics as diverse as agri-
culture,  Central America, trade,  the  global spread  of nuclear  weap-
ons, long-term  health care,  U.S.-Third  World relations  and working
families were developed.
Two thousand  citizens,  selected to reflect the demographic  and
political  diversity  of their states,  served on statewide  citizens  assem-
blies.  The  assemblies  developed  a set of tough,  informed  questions
for  the presidential  candidates  to which  they requested  written  re-
88sponses.  In the end, nearly  one  hundred  policy  questions,  covering
seven topics,  were delivered  to the  thirteen candidates,  netting a
written response  rate of 80  percent.  Their answers  were far and
away the most comprehensive  statements made on these subjects  at
that point in the campaign.  The overall quality of these materials led
to their repeated use by news organizations,  political analysts and
civic and educational  organizations  all over the country.  In addition,
hundreds  of project participants  also had the opportunity to face and
directly  question presidential candidates  at three televised town hall
meetings  which  in turn attracted  large  viewing  audiences.  What
drove  this  process  to a successful  conclusion  was not the  Roosevelt
Center per se, but rather the robust participation of thousands of or-
dinary citizens  in the project and  the media's  fascination  with what
they  regarded  as  an  unconventionally  wholesome  exercise  in
grassroots democracy.
Presidential Agenda  Project
The Center's current  Presidential  Agenda  Project represents  our
latest effort to forge linkages between citizens and policy makers.
This Saturday  in Peoria,  Illinois,  the  first of fourteen  regional
agenda-setting  forums  will take place.  Across  the country  from  Los
Angeles  to Savannah,  these forums  will involve  1,200 people,  re-
cruited  through an open application  process,  who reflect  their com-
munities'  diversity.
These  citizens-farmers,  retirees,  students,  business  and  profes-
sional  people,  blue  collar  workers  and  homemakers,  Republicans,
Democrats  and  political  independents-will  gather  to  determine
which  national problems they think the new President should make
his  top priorities  in 1989.  They will decide  which strategies,  both
budgetary  and nonbudgetary,  the next administration should invoke
in pursuing their chosen policy priorities.  They will be challenged to
reconcile  their views on policy and spending priorities  with the
deficit-reduction  requirements  of Gramm-Rudman-Hollings-and
they will be free to expand,  retain,  reduce or repeal  the Gramm-
Rudman-Hollings  targets.
In November,  a document called  "A Citizen's Agenda for the
President,"  a report based  on the results  generated by the Center's
regional forums,  will be delivered to the President-elect  and his sen-
ior  advisors.  We  are confident the  report  will be respectfully  re-
ceived and seriously regarded.  Late next spring,  our regional assem-
blies  will reconvene  at "first  hundred  day conferences"  to appraise
the new  administration's  policy agenda and  reassess their own  pol-
icy concerns and preferences.
WTTW/Chicago  and WLS-TV,  two of the country's premier public
and commercial television stations,  and the Center are cosponsoring
two sets  of televised  forums with  the presidential  candidates in  Oc-
89tober.  One set of forums  will feature members of the Illinois Citizens
Assembly  posing questions  directly to Mr.  Bush and Mr.  Dukakis at
separate sessions about their plans and priorities; these  programs
are expected  to be  carried widely throughout the  Public Broadcast-
ing  System  (PBS)  and  perhaps  by  National  Public  Radio (NPR)  as
well.  The second set  of town meetings  will bring  120  bright and ac-
complished  Chicago  area  high  school  seniors together  with each
nominee for a one-hour,  prime time question and answer session.
The  Center  believes  that  opportunities  for  interested  citizens  to  in-
teract  with the  candidates  in settings  in which  informed  citizens
share center-stage  with our would-be  leaders  are desperately  need-
ed.  The delivery in November of citizen recommendations  on policy
and spending priorities represents  a different, but no less important,
linkage to the policy-making  process.
What is the rationale  for the Presidential  Agenda  Project?  The
President-elect  will not lack for advice.  Future  cabinet members,
members of Congress,  political allies,  policy experts,  veterans  of for-
mer administrations  and public  opinion  and  media  advisors  all  will
seek to influence  the shape,  texture  and rhythm  of the new  admin-
istration.
But  will  there  be  any room at  the table  for ordinary  Americans?
The Presidential Agenda Project is designed to make a little room at
the decision-making table for a representative cross-section  of Amer-
icans.
This program  is  an experiment;  the  outcome  is  impossible to pre-
dict.  I  cordially invite you to consider organizing  fifteen,  thirty  or
fifty  citizens  in your own community to participate  in the agenda-
setting project.
Permanent Regional  Operations
The agenda  project  is the prelude  to the Center's chartering per-
manent  operations  in  thirteen  regions  of the country  by the end  of
1988.  In time,  we hope to create a nationwide  network of democratic
laboratories  that will  continuously  provide  interested  citizens,  jour-
nalists  and  students with policy education  experiences  and ex-
panded opportunities  to engage  the policy making community.
These charter programs  will have salaried staff,  be budgeted in 1989
at between $70,000 and  $150,000  each, and  be governed jointly  by
local boards of advisors and the Center's staff.
It's been said that there is only one thing worse than a hopeless ro-
mantic-and that  is  a hopeful  one.  My  colleagues  on this  panel and
I-and presumably most of you too-are hopeless  romantics.  We  all
believe that our democratic  system can,  indeed  must, be made to
work  better.  We  all  believe,  to recall Shaw,  that we deserve  some-
thing better than what we are getting.  But we also know that a dem-
ocratic renaissance  will not come easily or cheaply.  It will require
90work,  dedication, money, faith-and yes, a hard-edged romanticism.
We are pleased to be part of this effort and hope that in the end the
Center will have contributed  modestly to improving  the quality of
our representative  democracy.
91

REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY: MAKING IT WORK BETTER

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics