A Study on the Subject Matter Limitations on Direct Democracy Measures in the U.S. - With the Implications upon Korean Residents Voting System -

Abstract

The most important benefit of direct democracy measures in the United States is that it brings accountability into the representative structure of the government whose accountability is undermined by the faulty election system and an inherent problem with the theory and practice of representation. However, defects in direct democracy undermine the system, leading to demoralizing effects in the voting process and the implementation of this system. Many commentators have proposed suggestions to make the direct democracy voting educative, participatory, deliberative, and capable of reflecting the majority will of the people. However, recognizing that procedural reform is necessary but cannot, by itself, guarantee the protection of democratic and constitutional values, this article discusses the structural and substantive contextualization of direct democracy measures in particular limitations related to subject matter in initiative law making. Subject matter related limitation on initiatives should be devised and introduced carefully due to the possibility of unconstitutionality and misuse of citizen law making. Addressing the defects in the structure and procedure of direct democracy would make it more effective and proper subjects and general policy initiative is recommendable. Direct democracy is also valuable in that it opens a channel for the people who could not achieve their social policy through the ordinary passage of legislature. Korean residents voting do have subject matter limitations as well. Some subject matter limitations on citizen initiatives are recommended but with caution in order not to bring about detrimental effect on the local direct democracy measures which are the very grassroots democracy.