Bill Singer Proposes National Economic Referendum

August 6, 2011

Below is an excerpt from Bill Singer's article: "The No Nothing Party and Woody Allen's Choice" (Forbes, Street Sweeper, August 6, 2011)

No Nothings

In the mid-19th Century, the United States saw the rise and fall of the Know Nothing party.  In 2011, we witness the rise of the No Nothing movement, whose motto seems to be a "No" for everything and "Nothing" in terms of a workable solution that a majority of Americans will support.  In the face of such intransigence, we have drafted deadlock, ideology, and dogma in lieu of pragmatic legislation. 

I don't trust the political hacks from the Republican and Democratic parties to get this right - I simply trust that each elected official will persist in doing whatever is necessary to advance partisan politics at the expense of our country's best interests.  Similarly, I have no hope for anything meaningful from the Tea Party.  Petulance is not a strategy for restoring the United States' full faith and credit.  Last I looked, the nation's motto was E Pluribus Unum, not I Told You So.

As such, I renew with vigor my call for a national referendum on the future economic policies of our nation.  Instead of appointing Congressional committees populated with partisan politicians, I would prefer that the Republican, Democratic, and Tea parties draft their specific versions of comprehensive economic reform legislation.  I would then welcome the preparation of additional drafts with competing plans.  For my part, I would urge serious citizens such as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg to become actively engaged in drafting competing plans.

Let us then submit those proposals to a popular vote with the requirement that the two plans receiving the most votes after a primary-type ballot would then be ultimately submitted to the American public for a vote within, say, 90 days.  During that interim, Congress would be welcome to draft a super-majority counter-plan that would be listed on the same final ballot.  If Congress can't win a super-majority approval for its effort, then the resulting ballot would be a choice between the two most popular plans from the primary. Whatever plan is ultimately approved by the largest number of votes would be promulgated into law.  Moreover, all Americans would then have a moral obligation to unite behind the legislation and see that it is timely implemented.

Okay, maybe not a perfect suggestion or even a great idea but, hey, I'm putting it out there to generate discussion and debate.  Please, feel free to comment and add additional suggestions or options.

READ the entire article.