Act, Section 3

That the Electoral Trust processes initiatives chronologically means that initiatives are processed on a first-come first-serve basis and receive an equal share of time as they progress through the initiative process. That some initiatives will be of greater interest to the public than other initiatives is certain, but there is no obvious way to prioritize initiatives or order them in some way other than chronologically.

What if there are too many initiatives? (1m 58s)

Deliberative procedures are a vital part of lawmaking. The procedures defined in the Act emulate the procedures employed by Congress that have been developed over more than two hundred years. Like any legislative body, an agency is necessary to administer the procedures. In this instance the Electoral Trust detailed in Section 4 administers legislative procedures on behalf of the People. Political parties impair the impartiality of the administration of representative legislatures. This is not the case for the Legislature of the People where impartiality and transparency are vital for its credibility. This can only be guaranteed by a transparent automatic process in which all initiatives, regardless of sponsorship, are qualified and processed chronologically on a first-come, first-served basis in each distinct step of the initiative process.

For example, if the Electoral Trust qualifies two initiatives: Initiative A, which qualifies on June 1 and Initiative B, which qualifies on June 2, the public hearing process for Initiative A will begin before the public hearing process for Initiative B does. Because some steps of the initiative process will take longer for initiatives that are broader in scope or deal with more complex issues, the fact that an initiative qualifies for election before another may not always mean that its election is conducted before the other one. In the above example, initiative A may deal with a complex issue of national scope whereas initiative B may deal with a straightforward issue of municipal scope. In this case it is quite possible that the public hearing and Deliberative Committee processes will take longer to complete for initiative A than for initiative B; consequently, initiative B may achieve election before initiative A does, even though initiative A qualified for election first.