Direct Democracy is a form of government in which all citizens can directly participate in the decision-making process. (Direct Democracy Campaign, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).
Daniel B. Jeffs, founder, The Direct Democracy Center, states that the problems are due to the Government being too large and too dangerously powerful. He firmly believes that elected representatives are corrupted by a deeply flawed system that seduces them with money and power to gain and remain in office, or seek higher office and that in this process it has disenfranchised the overall electorate. Finally, he states that this system needs to be altered in such a way that it will override the practice of selective democracy by factions and vested interests.
The solution according to him lies in nonpartisan elections and government with more democracy. In this age of communications and information technology, the Constitution should be amended so as to establish direct democracy by means of secure voting networks connected to voter's homes. All elections would be conducted over the voting networks. In this proposed system the elected representatives would be nonpartisan, highly qualified professional government managers. To keep it honest, with no more government than we need, well-informed voters should decide matters of taxation and public policy. And the collective judgment of our fellow citizens (which could be trusted because the direct democracy voting networks would require voters to be truthfully informed) would know what is best for all of us. (Daniel B. Jeffs, The Direct Democracy Center).
The advantages of Direct Democracy are that first, it would remove the barrier between the electorate and the government. Secondly, in Representative Democracy the voter has to vote for one party or the other with no guarantee of either party addressing the issues facing the voter, on the other hand in Direct Democracy the voter will be voting on each issue separately. Thirdly, decisions will always be that of the people rather than that of a few politicians. Fourthly, it encourages people to be more proactive in the political process, this results in a more deterministic future for the voter. Fifthly, it curbs the power of the elite. Sixthly, the practice of elected representatives following the diktats of party leaders and civil servants to the detriment of the voter will cease. Seventhly, quid - pro - quo transactions between the elected representatives and the rich and powerful pressure groups will cease altogether. Eighthly, thorny and uncomfortable issues which elected representatives would do anything to avoid, will be addressed by this system.
Ninthly, there would be control on governmental tendencies running towards the dictatorial. And finally, the system of Direct Democracy is more democratic. (Direct Democracy Campaign).
The disadvantages of Direct Democracy are that: first, all citizens must be actively involved on all issues all of the time. For very large population groups, it might become well nigh impossible to do so. Secondly, the public generally gives only superficial attention to political issues and is thus susceptible to charismatic arguments. Thirdly, the decision of all or most matters