Jacob, 2002, p. 3 wrote:
The Democracy Act proscribes that no initiative may contain more than 5,000 words. This word length restriction should be removed. Though it does seem reasonable, since voters are likely to oppose having to vote on measures so complex as to require more than 5,000 words, why restrict the voters?

Let us put our faith back in the voters by trusting their ability to defeat measures they view as too complex or measures they do not care to spend hours reading and studying. Moreover, if voters desire to place such a limit on themselves, let them do it through the soon to be functional Legislature of the People and not tied into the original proposal for the National Initiative for Democracy.

The limit of 5000 words is retained to make NI4D more marketable. Once the American people are comfortable with the National Initiative procedures then increasing the limit can be the subject of an initiative. The limit can be increased to 25,000 words (to admit, e.g., the FairTax proposal) or removed entirely.

The 5,000-word limitation is intended to preclude unnecessarily long measures that offer opportunities for sponsors to cloak legal or technical language that they do not wish to bring to the attention of the voters. It is not an unreasonable limit. The Democracy Act itself, which might be considered the Mother of All Initiatives, is expressed in less than 3,200 words.