NEWS The United States’ minority discrimination toward politic July 26, 2022July 26, 2022 Joseph Henry 0 Comments Americans’ discontent with their representative democracy system is growing. Some support using direct democracy more frequently, such as through ballot initiatives. The “Brexit” proposal, which officially began the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union, was supported by voters in the country [1-3].Initiatives on the ballot can be authored by anybody and voted on by the people outside of the regular legislative procedure. Issues including same-sex marriage, tax reform, and marijuana legalization have been addressed through well-known initiatives. Advocates claim that increasing the adoption of such strategies might help combat public alienation from and skepticism toward politics [4-6].Direct democracy proponents contend that individuals gain an understanding of politics by actively voting on policy proposals. Since the Progressive Era, assertions supporting the advantages of direct democracy have frequently surfaced. Political scholar Ben Barber claims that initiatives and referendums “may strengthen citizen involvement in and accountability for government.”[7-9].Liberals and conservatives alike, as well as members of both political parties, favor direct democracy. Progressives of today frequently assert that a ballot initiative may address issues like gerrymandering or improper political spending. Conventional wisdom once said that conservatives only supported ballot initiatives and referendums [9, 10].Voter turnout can be increased via ballot initiatives, but they often do so by mobilizing infrequent voters and encouraging voting out of fear. When California approved Proposition 13 in 1978, it inspired tax-cutting legislation all around the nation. Prior to the legalization of same-sex unions, states established legislation defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman through ballot initiatives and voter-approved constitutional amendments [11-13].Initiative proposals can be used to circumvent the American legislative process, which is renowned for its emphasis on compromise and incrementalism. Measures that attack the rights of minority group members, such as efforts to restrict affirmative action and define marriage as occurring between a man and a woman, can enrage some majority group voters. In states that commonly employ the initiative compared to states that don’t, there is a considerably stronger correlation between party identity and polarized issue opinions [14, 15].Citizens’ faith in government is decreased, not increased, by the frequent use of ballot initiatives. Famously, James Madison contended that “personal security” and “property rights” were incompatible with pure democracies. Writers: More than the claims of would-be reformers, a national referendum procedure may reflect what really happened in the U.K [16-18].In summary, Initiatives can be used to get around the American legislative system, which is notorious for putting a strong focus on compromise and incremental change. In 1978, California voters enacted Proposition 13, which served as a model for tax-cutting legislation across the country. Prior to same-sex marriage being legal, states passed ballot initiatives and constitutional amendments with public approval that defined marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman. References R. Baldwin and C. Wyplosz, EBOOK The Economics of European Integration 6e. McGraw Hill, 2019. J. S. Fishkin, Democracy when the people are thinking: Revitalizing our politics through public deliberation. Oxford University Press, 2018. P. Webb and T. Bale, The modern British party system. Oxford University Press, 2021. G. Staszewski, “Rejecting the myth of popular sovereignty and applying an agency model to direct democracy,” Vand. L. Rev., vol. 56, p. 395, 2003. S. P. Nicholson, Voting the agenda: Candidates, elections, and ballot propositions. Princeton University Press, 2021. M. Schwarzschild, “Popular Initiatives and American Federalism, or, Putting Direct Democracy in Its Place,” J. Contemp. Legal Issues, vol. 13, p. 531, 2003. D. Altman, Direct democracy worldwide. Cambridge University Press, 2010. D. B. Magleby, “Let the Voters Decide-An Assessment of the Initiative and Referendum Process,” U. Colo. L. Rev., vol. 66, p. 13, 1994. S. Bowler and T. Donovan, The limits of electoral reform. OUP Oxford, 2013. F. Rosenbluth and I. Shapiro, Responsible parties: Saving democracy from itself. Yale University Press, 2018. D. P. Green and A. S. Gerber, Get out the vote: How to increase voter turnout. Brookings Institution Press, 2019. A. S. Gerber and T. Rogers, “Descriptive social norms and motivation to vote: Everybody’s voting and so should you,” The Journal of Politics, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 178-191, 2009. T. Donovan, “Direct democracy and campaigns against minorities,” Minn. L. Rev., vol. 97, p. 1730, 2012. A. M. Thernstrom, Whose votes count?: Affirmative action and minority voting rights. Harvard University Press, 1987. M. E. Kraft and S. R. Furlong, Public policy: Politics, analysis, and alternatives. Cq Press, 2019. J. S. N. P. Z. David and C. King, Why people don’t trust government. Harvard University Press, 1997. T. DeLuca, The two faces of political apathy. Temple University Press, 1995. A. Heywood, Political ideologies: An introduction. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2021.