- After reading this charter, please feel free to discuss major changes on the Talk page.
The Role of Government Edit
Whereas, it is in society's best interest to have as many of its citizens as possible be Self Actualized,
Whereas, there is a direct correlation between the percentage of citizens in a society whose fundamental needs are met, the percentage of citizens that can be classified as productive members of society, and the rate at which the society advances educationally, economically, technologically and in terms of the well being, generosity and the decreased tendency towards illict behavior by its citizens.
The government has a duty to ensure that its citizens most fundamental needs such as their physiological and safety needs are met, and also has a duty to help its citizens meet their love, belonging, and esteem needs. In addition, the government must ensure that it is fiscally responsible and that all of its activities are carefully monitored and sustainable in the long term both thru employment and population patterns, and thru unanticipated crises.
Accomplishing this however requires a number of specific mandates.
Individual Rights Edit
Individuals are free to act as they will as long as their actions do not violate or have a high probability of violating (such as by causing physical or psychological damage) the rights of other individuals without their consent. Only in those instances where the rights of others have been violated or are at increased risk of being violated would the legal system come into play. This simple principle in itself assures a number of civil liberties a sample of which are included below.
The government must not make any attempt to abridge the freedom of speech or press, or impose censorship except in the cases of fraud, misrepresentation or threats.
An individual has the right to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others.
Consenting adults have the right to private choice in marriage and consensual sexual activity.
The government has the right to regulate the use those drugs that have been associated with aggression or highly addictive properties that are associated with theft and other criminal behavior. It has the right to regulate drug related activities that increase the risk of harm to other individuals without their consent such as drunken driving. But the government has no right to limit the use of drugs not associated with aggression or highly addictive properties by consenting adults in the privacy of their own homes.
The Legal System Edit
There are numerous problems with all current legal systems that are best illustrated here
In order to bring the legal system as close to the ideal as possible, a very well defined classification system would be employed that is slightly more specific than the ones employed by a few western countries. For example, murder (the violation of another individual's most fundamental right) would have a well defined classification system similar to the one outlined below. Accidental - When the guilty party clearly had no intention of hurting anyone and didn't do anything that he could have known would put someone in risk of being seriously harmed. This would almost never lead to time in jail.
Negligent - When the guilty party had no intention of harming anyone but knowingly acted in a manner that increased the probability that they may seriously harm or kill another individual. Examples: Falling asleep while driving an automobile by not pulling over when they felt tired. Driving an automobile at speeds in excess of what is generally considered safe.
Gross Neglegence - Example: Knowingly pointing a loaded gun at the victim without intending for the gun to go off. This would be a relatively serious crime.
Neglectful - When the guilty party neglects to help someone that they accidentally or negligently hurt. Example: Running away from the scene of an accident leading to the victim's death. This would be a very serious charge.
Intentional - The guilty party had a definite intent to harm someone. This would be the most serious charge and would carry the heaviest punishment.
Defensive - The guilty party kills an individual believing that they or another person will likely be very seriously injured or killed by the individual if they do not act. This would almost never lead to punishment if there were no reasonable alternatives under the circumstances.
Aggravated - The guilty party loses their temper without too significant a reason and seriously harms another person leading to their death. This would be a serious charge as well.
Reasonably Aggravated - The guilty party loses their temper for a very understandable and sympathetic reason. This would not carry nearly as heavy a punishment. Example: A father harming the person who raped his daughter.
There are numerous advantages to using such a system. Actions that were intended to physically harm or psychologically traumatize another individual would be punished significantly more heavily than those that were not. Violations of another individual's rights would be very clearly defined not just based on the right that was violated but also based on the reason for which this right was violated in order to ensure that the punishment for these violations always fits the crime. Each of these classifications would carry a significantly more substantial punishment if the intent to kill can be demonstrated. Furthermore, if the victim isn't killed but could have been, the guilty party would be charged with a crime based on the category above that the crime describes with the prefix "Attempted" attached to it and would face a slightly less severe punishment than had they succeeded. The mental state and psychological development of the guilty party at the time of act as well as the amount of time that the individual had to decide to act in the manner that they did would be fundamentally key factors in determining the appropriate punishment. Thus human fallibility and momentary lapses either of judgment or sanity would be accounted for and lead to significantly less severe punishments.
Guilt or innocence are to be determined by all-volunteer juries who have the common-law right to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law.
Prisons shall serve as institutions where individuals who are genuinely harmful to society are taken off the streets, reformed and reintegrated into society as productive self actualized individuals, and so they shall also serve as punishment to discourage unlawful behavior, but this system shall not make a scrapegoat out of any innocent common man for any misjustice commited. Reform is the primary imperitive of the penal system, and it is thus imperative that prisoners do not endure any significant trauma or psychological damage during their stay as not doing so would run counter to this imperitive.
The Tax Code Edit
A very simple yet progressive tax code is a fundamental component of any successful democracy.
Each dependent and individual covered under the file gets a 10,000 tax exemption. Thus a family of four making $40,000 would pay nothing in taxes. The only other tax exemptions would be on all income spent on tuition for educational institutions and on all income donated to carefully monitored nonprofit institutions.
For each dollar above this, the individuals pay 30% on the revenue in taxes for up to $100,000
For each dollar above this, the individuals pay 45% in taxes.
Corporate taxes would also follow a similar simple progressive code that gives an advantage to small business and exempts all revenue spent on employee salaries from the tax code in order to encourage the spending of additional revenue on hiring new employees and expanding the company. This makes sense as the salaries are already being taxed through the income tax.
In addition, state taxes, local taxes, sales taxes and all other taxes will no longer be collected. States will be granted funding equivalent to the average income tax collected for every two individuals who reside in the state to spend of infrastructure, law enforcement and education.
Keeping the tax code this simple eliminates excess spending on bueracracy, makes tax evasion very difficult and decreases the benefits that lobbyists can provide to specific interest groups.
Federal Spending Edit
A primary perogative is to prevent the accumilation of large amounts of national debt. To accomplish this, a law should be considered to prevent any incumbant from running for reelection if they fail to make up for any defecit spending over the past four years by the election year.
Ideally, the federal government should limit spending on national defense to 15% of the total budget, and spend a minimum of 10% of its budget on education, training, employment and social services and a minimum of 3% of its budget on international aid.
By comparison, for the year 2005, the United States has spent 20% of its budget on national defense, 11% of its budget on paying the interest on the national debt 4% of which is offset by the interest generated from social security accounts (payments into social security are the source of 37% of the federal revenue and only account for 22% of its spending), 4% on education, training, employment and social services and less than .1% of its budget on international aid as indicated by the National Priorities Project.
Federal Safety Nets Edit
In order to ensure that the fundamental needs of its citizens are met, safety nets such as social security, medicare, medicaid, food and clothing stamps, educational loans, aid for single parents, child health insurance and job training and transportation for the unemployed are absolutely essential.