Baby Boomer Budget

Dear Contra_Folk,

Hear that chanting, “Hell No, We Won’t Let It Go” or those wild screaming sounds coming from the Hill?  No? Rather, the non-resident sound of deafening silence from Canadians under the age of 50, who were just “Greek-like” robbed overnight by their Minister of Deceptive Finance of Thousands of Dollars in reduced OAS lifetime benefits for everyone not classified as an active Baby Boomer (age 50+).

Federal Budget…Who cares? Please go away.  They surely don’t want knowledgeable insiders to raise a stink and create attention to the facts of austerity for the 0-49 year old working poor, and material reduced entitlements (without discussion) save the Budget Day surprise announcement for anyone under 50?  In the US, they are up in arms over a benefit entitlement changes 35-40yrs out.   In Canada,… 16 yrs notice is all you get to accumulate $481,460 .

  That’s age discrimination.   Luckily for those under 50, it’s probably not Constitutional either.  

It would seem if you watched mainstream news outlets bought and controlled by the Gubbermint that your loss of entitlements was simply just “Yesterday’s News Story” and must go away.   

All the usual paid and propped Banksters broadcasting expert spun commentary “… less than expected” as if independence existed for anyone on air.   So, all is well and fine it would seem.   Move along sleepy sheep and extend or defer your actuarially computed entitlement obligation so that we (Gubbermint) can spend it all away… right now today.

For those not a Boomer (ie: 49 & under) however, the new two year extension for no longer receiving a basic living poverty allowance from the old age of 65 is now delayed to 67 which results in a reduction in your benefits of (a non-inflation indexed) $ 540.12 monthly max. x 24 months = $12,960 compounded @CPI of 3.5% eighteen (Future Age 67 – Today Age 49=18) years from today.

Rate per Period**:
%
Number of Periods:
Payment Amount: $
Payment Due at:
of period
Future Value: $ -24,073.06

As a result, morning after Budget day, every 49yr old, lost $-24,073.06 in future entitlements 18 years from now, or in future retirement income cash flows terms today.    They Vanished.   Just vaporized.  No longer a Public Policy future liability.  This actuarial adjustment frees up lots of unallocated present and future tax revenues… say future budget deficit decline anyone?

Bamboozled from every Canadian under the age of 49 is much more like it.   At 5%, that would equal replacement capital sum of money equal to $481,460 to earn back that lost entitlement income.  Guess what? That sum (half a million for every 49 Yr. Old Cdn) suddenly is now actuarially no longer needed to be “budgeted for” as an entitlement owed or liable by Gubbermints of the future to its senior citizens… phew.

Nothing much in this Balanced Budget indeed,

Contra_Man

Advertisements
Posted in Business, Debasement, debt ceiling, Economics, Investment, Investment Finance, Monetization, Quantitative Easing, Stock Market | Leave a comment

A Bankster Tsunami of QUI TAM Coming Instead of QE?

Dear Contra_Folk,

Time to chip in about the SEC and Tax Dept.’s lack of big gun enforcement.  We all know that a lack of trust has developed regarding the Fedsury’s financial “Control+Alt+P” system of liquefying a command economy, its rules and regulations for investor protection, etc. and that will take time to repair after what happened to the words TRUST in all prospectus issued since 2007/8.

In the meanwhile, imagine the SEC enforcement division and the IRS with pay-for-performance bonuses rivaling WallStreet DC’s comp. structure.   Who around this table would absolutely now just love to be an Auditor.    Walk the Perps and get .0001% of all international payments seized by Taxpayers as a result of conducting “pay for performance” during tax evasion investigations and global property seizures.

“Smell it, smell it.., Now go get it, Boy!”

It would be the new hit reality show.   BibbyBrian just became a Billionaire!

If Pay for Performance is what you want… then become an Auditor or Whistle-blower, work for or hunt down and find a tax dodger and make $11.7m for the season opening premier show :

RothsChilds Routers-

        “Two whistle-blowers, Victor Bibby and Brian Donnelly, will split $11.7 million out of the $45 million JPMorgan agreed to pay to settle the veterans case, said Brandon Peak, a lawyer working on the case. Claims against other banks in the case are pending.

The settlement underscores the benefits provided to taxpayers from whistle-blowers and the incentives for those who expose fraud through so-called qui tam cases, Peak said.

“This is what qui tam actions are for — to incentivize people to come forward and expose fraud,” he said. “The taxpayers actually receive this money back that they never would have received absent these whistle-blowers.”

Szymoniak said her review of mortgage documents uncovered the practice known as robo-signing, in which bank officials and contractors signed tens of thousands of foreclosure documents at a time without verifying any of the information. The same people also used various job titles on the forms, Szymoniak said. “

So get in line all of you potential Tax auditors, Enforcement Regulators paid by commission, and Whistle-blowers… for you are now the next great “paid for” Job Stimulus Recovery Plan.

I Think I Saw A PuddyCat. 

Tweet tweet,

ContraMan

Posted in Business, debt ceiling, Economics, Investment, Investment Finance, Monetization, Quantitative Easing, Stock Market | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Markets Without Price Discovery…Aren’t Markets

Dear Contra_Folk,

They’re simply rigged auctions for the highest bidder to then reward themselves with absolute control for their sole profit taking.  This power enables Fedsury Banksters (Emergency Stability Fund) to then swing for the fences with free will, and with zero logic, or sentiment towards the economic consequence of those actions.  Dictatorial power with no oversight results in “no-contest” settlements.

Pretend to End the Fed    As they control the various markets, they can produce any outcome of faux price discovery, or anticipated result for which they profit from… both up and down.    The best performing hedge fund for 2011 was the Federal Reserve Branch of New York.  93% of the time, not always,  profiting “both ways” from having the ultimate control of “printed prices” is quite an advantage; for it does not take long to “earn back” the “profits” necessary from the future modelled housing mortgage write-offs, the Standfor and Madman ponzi write-offs, the financial crisis write-offs, the MF Global write-offs, the EuroCrisis write downs,  Frankie Doubts Basel Legislation and other sovereign future credit events, etc.

Every Crisis/Credit Event = New Profit Centre

What this should mean to you Contra_Folk, is that you should consider taking a decade, or two, off from the rigged game.   Contra_Folks’ most important quality for risk hedging is mobility. Consider leaving this playground entirely and go somewhere else with your marbles.  Perhaps creating your own mini private equity fund – offline, and design purposefully useful utilities for oneself and even maybe provide utility to/for others, think and help grow local, and in most cases, your new sandbox will be much more secure, personally rewarding, and financially successful endeavour towards finding a dividend worth discounting and finding real GARP (Growth at a Reasonable Prices).

New Efficient Frontiers

Hard to do with a billion kazillion, that’s the 1%’s true problem (effective diversification of ones net worth) but relatively possible and fairly easy to accomplish with today’s technological innovators (micro lending sites, bitcoin, angel networks, etc) with a few hundred thousand… all the way to a few dozen million.

Rent-A-New Start with LifeStart (TM) or visit www.LifeStart.com

Into to owing stocks in businesses? Perhaps now you should try owing real business(es)?  How about an idea like purchasing and eventually owning a 15-unit, or if you can, a 150 unit, vertically integrated trending hot spot location.   You, your friends, and family could de-register your multi-decade stagnant RRSPs, 401(k)’s, college education funds, borrow to invest some more money into the business – and write the whole thing off.  No net change. Rocking chair taxable income to net zero.  Except now if your business grows (unlike a certain can-kicking debt funded faux markets) and doubles or triples over the next ten or twenty years, it will likely be 100% tax free (with LCGE).

Mobile Work Farce

Did you know that you can now get BDC to finance (at 3.5%) a new form of turn-key investment vehicles for achieving your long term investment goals.   They’ll give you the development money for your head office and help you organize your own management company, taking a solid 10% or 15% supervising fee (your retirement dividend cheque) for having the foresight in hiring a live-in superintendent to manage and collect the rent from your newly furnished commercial enterprise(s) & a suite of furnished private rental housing units/properties.   All of these commercial and residential units are “rent to own” for the workers.   So if desired, they could “rent-to-own” both housing suites and the commercial businesses from you over time – all at a compounded 12.5% interest rate per annum, for you the business owner, to earn out over time as well.

Get Approved Today with NewStart (TM) and Improve Your Lot in Life Today! Call 1-888-NEW-START Now.

Not being limited to just the services industry (internet bars, coffee shops, hair/barbers, massage, yoga, laundry, take away food prep services, health food stores, organic grass fed butchers, smart phone centre), why not target “unlisted” information age businesses, aiding the transition over the internet from the industrial age to the new information age.  Prototype plastic layering printers, nano technology hubs, for if information is knowledge, and knowledge is real power, then power is always able to be generated at a point in time when information is allowed to roam free.  Somewhat like the internet of yester years.

No Tracking Error For This Trend

That was until 2008, when the domain of Warren McGraws, Blooming Bliderbugs, Cloak Bros. Institute, or Routers from Chateau Lafite trembled and crumbled.   Nowadays that control is accomplished through Sovereign Central Banksters, Plutocrats’ Puppeteers, who are all willing to issue more bonds/print (causing dollar devaluation to purchase goods and services) of taxpayers’ future promises, for future taxation, on future generations…, but not us, not now – we’re too poor.  Just look a the merry go round with the BOC singing Canary, ex-goldenslacker, who now heads the global Financial Instability Board along with Global Capital Clearing Settlements newly appointed Duddley Fuddley, NY Club Fed Member, who also just took over the Canary’s recently vacated position at the head of global settlements.

So today, we are selling out three (3) units in both Udow-n (+14%) and Upro-N (+19%).  Adding (5) five brand new money units into TVIX-n, adding the one (1) last unit in HVU-t to increase exposure to one full position of implied volatility for a date later this month.    Da VIX is now simply just another ESF Fedsury manipulated can-kicking “risk off/return on” propaganda measurement device used vaguely to enforce, or destroy, any perceived form of cause and effect from Gubbermint policy, or announced programs.

It’s all about who controls developing bidirectional ebbs and flows of good, or bad news, and thus the VIX simply helps Gubbermint anticipate future better times based upon misinformed mass perceptions of 52-wl lows on implied volatility.

Who’s in Backwardation?  I’ll Buy That Future.

Contra_Man

Posted in Business, Economics, Investment, Investment Finance, Monetization, Quantitative Easing, Stock Market | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Hyper Re-Hypothecation

Dear Contra_Folk,
Say What? Your supposedly “just like cash in the bank” AAA Money Market Mutual Funds (MMF’s) are likely next to reveal some funny money custodianship and transparency issues with rotting collateral off the books from hidden UK-based repo holdings.   The MMF’s are very likely going to have to take market haircuts to their debt holdings at some point, maybe even impact the almighty $1.00 NAV value – all overnight.
Break the Buck – Never Say Never
“With weak collateral rules and a level of leverage that would make Archimedes tremble, firms have been piling into re-hypothecation activity with startling abandon. A review of filings reveals a staggering level of activity in what may be the world’s largest ever credit bubble.
Engaging in hyper-hypothecation have been Goldman Sachs ($28.17 billion re-hypothecated in 2011), Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (re-pledged $72 billion in client assets), Royal Bank of Canada (re-pledged $53.8 billion of $126.7 billion available for re-pledging), Oppenheimer Holdings ($15.3 million), Credit Suisse (CHF 332 billion), Knight Capital Group ($1.17 billion),Interactive Brokers ($14.5 billion), Wells Fargo ($19.6 billion), JP Morgan($546.2 billion) and Morgan Stanley ($410 billion).
Nor is lending confined to between banks. Intra-bank re-hypothecation is also possible as evidenced by filings from Wells Fargo.  According to disclosures from Wachovia Preferred Funding Corp, its parent, Wells Fargo, acts as collateral custodian and has the right to re-hypothecate and use around $170 million of assets posted as collateral.”

Written with contributions from Jack Bunker and Nanette Byrnes.
 (This article was first published by Thomson Reuters’ Business Law Currents, a leading provider of legal analysis and news on governance, transactions and legal risk. Visit Business Law Currents online at http://currents.westlawbusiness.com. ) 
What this means to you and me is the financials have been using a backdoor, UK-based, non-public re-hypothecation scheme designed to REPO 105-like off balance sheet (thus non) disclosure of less quality assets held in this secret format, but again, only if held in the UK domestic market which is the only global market that allows re-pledging of pledges.  Only available in London you say, pity!
All paths lead to London,
Contra_Man
p.s. Money Market Funds Primer: Money market funds have been perceived as relatively low risk, compared to other mutual funds (and most other investments). By law, they can invest in only certain high-quality, highly rated short-term investments issued by sovereign governments, corporations, and state and local or municipal governments. Money market funds try to keep their net asset value (NAV) — which represents the value of one share in a fund — at a stable $1.00 per share. But the NAV may fall below $1.00 if the fund’s investments perform poorly or suffer an unexpected repricing haircut.  Investor losses have been rare, but they are possible.
Posted in Business, Investment, Investment Finance, Monetization, Stock Market | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Muddy Waters – Our Institutional Hero

Dear Contra_Folk,

After evidence of another SEC broad-based regulatory failure for not investigating another potential fraudulent foreign IPO listing entity (Chart),  we have to provide some highlight commentary to the complete and utter lack of any consequences for the SEC Commissioner, Mary B. Oblige, and her long serving staff in not asking for apparently, or completing any official deep reviews of fishy listing documents.  Fake it till you take it!

The CPP investment board and AGF never saw this either, apparently.  Ground Zero is the enforcement of regulatory rules, without that, it’s Bob Ponsi-land for any and all global financial terrorists.  List and take, list and take… until their is no “take”.   When that day arrives, who knows, but what it is surely to continue for a while.  Why that day of free market justice has still not arrived after instance, upon instance, of fixing – funny enough, is a symptom of the real problem.  Why not?  It’s very complex.  But, it all starts with the absence of independence from Owners vs. Management.

INSTITUTIONAL COLLABORATION

In a nut shell – institutions take significant fees for diligent and prudent capital management of large sized investment pools; not simply playing or speculating with investors money without recourse (restitution of lost capital) or providing any risk enforcement, fiduciary responsibility, or duty of care whatsoever.   Not replacing managers by voting institutional share blocks but instead with your shares, attempt to maintain the status quo of stock buy-backs, legal opinions to conduct Repo 105, off-balance sheet accounting gimmicks, or any true form of a substantive due diligence investment process.

What it means simply is this: a  market where what was instilled as process that was supposed to be a self serving, self-correcting system of market views has been abrogated.    Replaced by a conflicting system, absent of self-correcting forces of supply and demand, and are in essence, simply made up (fictional) economic numbers sustained by printing, not earning, money.

What we have is the worst of one world (the 99%’s) and the best of the other world (the 1%’s) – for he who has the job at the Table of Thirteen decides all supply and all demand and therefore, the price of everything.

State-ism vs. Free-ism

It seems that ANY advice you pay for is not “worth” the price charged.  For it requires zero intelligence to match a fixed, rigged – or fudged benchmark.  Index Funds still charge too much for doing very little but it is a step in the right direction considering the above facts from Muddy types…. MF&^%%$ Global, Sino-Forrest (another Muddy effort to disclose), STandford & Son, Maddov, and many more to come.

Parliament of Whores

So we vote them in and vote some out.   Politicians, whoever is in, then changes the laws to whatever they are “told to write“.   Seemingly, without any consequence of backlash – other than just wait until the next election.  Then, the Supreme Court pipes down and DOJ is suddenly AWOL for any bankster prosecution other than Mr. Co=resign, whipping boy or paperboy… only slacks that are of a golden hue really know.

So the next time you think of big managers of institutional capital, the Blackpaper.scissors, the Fauxguards of Boston, or the Infidelity types, think they are all irresponsible players in managing the stakeholders capital.  One only has to look at the largest losers of any “blowed up good” listed security and you will inevitably find an absent institutional ownership representative who is now, and forever more,  stuck holding the proverbial bag.

It’s Our Money.  Vote It or We’ll Move It.

Time to hold the institutional investment firms accountable (which means execution of YOUR stakeholders rights) because they hold positions of tremendous influence, yet provide very little in policy change, shareholder activism, allowing obvious and glaring holes in regulation to continue through the audit committees, and generally, they aid and abet in providing an environment of poor risk controls, and ultimately, systemic under-performance for their “Clients” value for the money.

When the news hits, we see very little retribution, fines, or charge backs.  Very little capital seems to move out as well.  No real penalties are even handed out, no slap on the wrists (even fraud), because, well.., it’s not OUR money – it’s YOUR risked capital.   Time to be heard, perhaps even scream, is upon us.   These people (money machines), are responsible for managing your Pension plan, but are controlled by Banksters who are allowed uncontrolled pilfering without loss of market participants.

Institutional mismanagement void of any duty of care is the new normal.

Transparency Matters,

Contra_Man

Posted in Business, debt ceiling, Economics, Investment Finance, Monetization, Quantitative Easing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Occupiers’ Guide For The 99% Amendment

Dear Contra_Folk,

What do the Occupy Wall Street types want?  What are their official demands? Probably change.  The same change 99% of all of us want, the change necessary to bring back confidence to the free markets, the change necessary to return to the Rule of Law for all, and the change necessary to eliminate the money motive from politics.  Thus ending crony corporate drip down social-capitalism and marking a fresh start towards putting an end to the blatant corruption of regulators and rampant fraud found in every facet of the modern economy.

Enforcement is the job of Regulators – not Banksters.

A ponzi scheme is a model that will always self destruct when the redemption demands exceeds all new or available funds.   In other words, all is fine until people start to withdraw their money.   Like Boomers, for instance.   Stuffing the pension plans with bi-weekly contributions from Yuppies earning 120’s during their contributory period.   All is fine and well until those Yuppy Boomers collectively ask Mr. Market for a little of it back… to live from with a little dignity over the next thirty plus years.  “Sure… you can have it when you need it back” says the Pig that ate the Python.

So, by adjusting specifics to the Law of the Land, through a transparent and democratic process, the Occupy Wall Street protest could very well change the system.

Without further delay, we present a copy of the U.S. legislative version below which needs an official House and Senate introduction, or motion, to become law for the 99% +1%:

The Democracy Amendment

  1. The sovereign authority and the legislative power of citizens of the United States to enact, repeal and amend public policy, laws, charters, and constitutions by local, state and national initiatives shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state.
  2. The United States Electoral Trust (hereinafter “Electoral Trust”) is hereby created to administer the procedures established by this Article and the Democracy Act. A Board of Trustees and a Director shall govern the Electoral Trust. The Board of Trustees shall be composed of one member elected by the citizens of each state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Territories of the United States. An election shall be conducted every two years to elect members of the Board of Trustees. Immediately after the first election, the elected members shall be divided as equally as possible into two classes. The seats of the members of the first class shall be vacated at the expiration of the second year; the seats of the members of the second class shall be vacated at the expiration of the fourth year. All members of the Board of Trustees shall serve for four years except the members of the first class. In order to facilitate the initial election of members to the Board of Trustees, an Interim Board is appointed by the Democracy Act. A Director responsible for day-to-day operations shall be appointed by the majority of the members of the Board of Trustees, except that the first Director shall be appointed by the Board of Directors of The Democracy Foundation.
  3. An initiative created under the authority of this Article that modifies a constitution or charter assumes the force of law when it is approved by more than half the registered voters of the relevant jurisdiction in each of two successive elections conducted by the Electoral Trust. If such initiative is approved in the first election, the second election shall occur no earlier than six months and no later than a year after the first election. An initiative created under the authority of this Article that enacts, modifies or repeals any statute assumes the force of law when approved by more than half the registered voters of the relevant jurisdiction participating in an election conducted by the Electoral Trust.
  4. Only natural persons who are citizens of the United States may sponsor an initiative under the authority of this Article.
  5. Only natural persons who are citizens of the United States may contribute funds, services or property in support of or in opposition to a legislative initiative created under the authority of this Article. Contributions from corporations including, but not limited to, such incorporated entities as industry groups, labor unions, political parties, political action committees, organized religions and associations, are specifically prohibited. Such entities are also prohibited from coercing or inducing employees, clients, customers, members, or any other associated persons to support or oppose an initiative created under the authority of this Article.
  6. The people shall have the power to enforce the provisions of this Article by appropriate legislation. No court in the United States may enjoin an initiative election except on grounds of fraud.

Next is the new Democratic Act.   Please visit http://ni4d.us/ to review the Act for details…

The Democracy Act

The Democracy Act
September 17, 2002

AN ACT establishing legislative procedures and an administrative agency to permit the citizens of the United States to exercise their legislative power; and adding to the Federal Code.

Be It Enacted By The People Of The United States:

    1. TITLE.
      This act shall be known and may be cited as the Democracy Act.
    2. PREAMBLE.
      We, the People of the United States, inherently possess the sovereign authority and power to govern ourselves. We asserted this power in our Declaration of Independence and in the ratification of our Constitution. We, the People, choose now to participate as lawmakers in our local, state and national governments. We, the People, shall exercise our legislative powers by initiative concurrently with the legislative powers we delegated to our elected representatives. THEREFORE, We, the People, enact this Democracy Act, establishing a “Legislature of the People.”
    3. PROCEDURES.
      The United States Electoral Trust (hereinafter “Electoral Trust”) shall qualify initiatives chronologically and shall conduct the entire initiative process chronologically. The Electoral Trust shall take advantage of contemporary technology in implementing these procedures. The essential elements of the initiative process include, but are not limited to, the following:

      1. Sponsor.
        Only citizens of the United States who are registered to vote may sponsor an initiative. The Sponsor shall be identified on the initiative, on any petition, and on any qualifying poll.
      2. Form.
        An initiative shall comprise a Title, a Summary, a Preamble that states the reasons for, and explains why, the initiative is proposed, and the complete text of the initiative.
      3. Content.
        An initiative shall pertain to a matter of public policy relevant to the government jurisdiction to which it is applicable. The Sponsor shall determine the wording of the initiative. The Title and Summary shall be subject to the approval of the Electoral Trust.
      4. Subject.
        An initiative shall address one subject only, but may include related or mutually dependent parts.
      5. Word Limit.
        An initiative shall contain no more than five thousand words, exclusive of the Title, Preamble, Summary, References, Definitions, and language that quotes existing law.
      6. Qualification.
        Following approval of the Title and Summary by the Electoral Trust, an initiative may qualify for election in the relevant government jurisdiction by any one of the following methods:

        1. Citizen Petition.
          An initiative shall qualify for election if it is the subject of a petition signed manually or electronically by a number of registered voters, to be specified by the Electoral Trust, within the relevant government jurisdiction. The time period allotted to gather qualifying petition signatures shall be not more than two years, beginning on the date the first signature is collected.
        2. Public Opinion Poll of Citizens.
          An initiative shall qualify for election if the subject matter described in the title and summary is approved in a public opinion poll. To qualify by this method, the polling plan, including the number of respondents, the methodology and the entity that will conduct the poll, shall be approved by the Electoral Trust.
        3. Legislative Resolution.
          An initiative shall qualify for election if a resolution, the wording of which is identical to the initiative as submitted by its sponsor, is passed by simple majority in the legislative body of the relevant jurisdiction; except that, if the initiative proposes to create or alter a constitution or charter, such resolution must pass by a two-thirds majority.
      7. Withdrawal.
        The Sponsor of an initiative may withdraw an initiative from further consideration and processing at any time prior to a deadline established by the Electoral Trust.
      8. Public Hearing.
        After an initiative qualifies for election, the Electoral Trust shall appoint a Hearing Officer to conduct a public hearing on the initiative. Representatives of the Sponsor and representatives of the legislative body of the relevant jurisdiction shall participate in the hearing in accordance with policies and procedures established by the Electoral Trust. Testimony on the initiative by citizens, proponents, opponents, and experts shall be solicited and their testimony shall be published as the Hearing Record.
      9. Deliberative Committee.
        After the public hearing on each initiative, the Electoral Trust shall convene a Deliberative Committee to review that initiative. The Deliberative Committee shall consist of citizens selected at random from the voter registration rolls of the relevant jurisdiction maintained by the Electoral Trust. Members of the Deliberative Committee shall be fairly compensated for time spent and expenses incurred in performance of Committee duties. The Electoral Trust shall provide technical support and such additional resources as are necessary for the effective discharge of the Committee’s duties. The Deliberative Committee shall review the Hearing Record, secure expert advice, deliberate the merits of the initiative, and prepare a written report of its deliberations and recommendations. By two-thirds vote, the Committee may alter the Title, Summary, Preamble or text of the initiative, provided that the changes are consistent with the stated purpose of the initiative.
      10. Legislative Advisory Vote.
        Each initiative, together with its Hearing Record and report of the Deliberative Committee, shall be transmitted to the legislative body of the relevant jurisdiction. The legislative body shall conduct a public vote of its members, recording the yeas and nays on the initiative, within 90 days after receipt thereof. The vote of the legislative body is non-binding, serving only as an advisory to the citizens.
      11. Election.
        Upon completion of the Legislative Advisory Vote, or 90 days after the initiative has been delivered to the legislative body of the relevant jurisdiction, whichever occurs first, the Electoral Trust shall publish a schedule for the election of the initiative and shall conduct an election in accordance with the published schedule.
      12. Enactment.
        An initiative that creates or modifies a constitution or charter assumes the force of law when it is approved by more than half the registered voters in the relevant jurisdiction in each of two successive elections conducted by the Electoral Trust. If such initiative is approved in the first election, the second election shall occur no earlier than six months and no later than a year after, the first election. An initiative that enacts, modifies or repeals statute law assumes the force of law when approved by more than half the registered voters participating in an election conducted by the Electoral Trust in the relevant jurisdiction.
      13. Effective Date.
        The effective date of an initiative, if not otherwise specified in the initiative, shall be forty-five days after certification of its enactment by the Electoral Trust.
      14. Judicial Review.
        No court shall have the power to enjoin any initiative election except on grounds of fraud. After an initiative has been enacted into statute law, courts, when requested, may determine the constitutionality of the law. Courts have no power to adjudicate initiatives that amend the United States Constitution.
      15. Promotional Communications.
        Any communication, regardless of the medium through which conveyed, that promotes or opposes an initiative shall conspicuously identify the person(s) responsible for that communication, in a manner specified by the Electoral Trust.
      16. Campaign Financing.
        Only United States citizens may contribute funds, services or property in support of or in opposition to an initiative. Contributions from corporations including, but not limited to, such incorporated entities as industry groups, labor unions, political parties, political action committees, organized religions and associations, are specifically prohibited. Such entities are also prohibited from coercing or inducing employees, clients, customers, members, or any other associated persons to support or oppose an initiative. Violation of these prohibitions is a felony punishable by not more than one year in prison, or a fine not to exceed One Hundred Thousand Dollars, or both, per instance, applied to each person found guilty of the violation.
      17. Financial Disclosure.
        The Electoral Trust shall establish financial reporting requirements applicable to initiative sponsors, proponents and opponents, with monetary thresholds appropriate to the affected government jurisdiction. The Electoral Trust shall make all financial reports available to the public immediately upon its receipt thereof. Failure of sponsors, proponents or opponents to comply with these reporting requirements shall be a felony punishable by not more than one year in prison or a fine not to exceed One Hundred Thousand Dollars, or both, per instance, applied to each person found guilty of the violation.
    4. UNITED STATES ELECTORAL TRUST.
      The Electoral Trust shall administer the Democracy Amendment and the Democracy Act. The Electoral Trust shall be governed by a Board of Trustees and a Director. The Electoral Trust shall take advantage of contemporary technology in carrying out its mission. The activities of the Electoral Trust shall be transparent to the public.

      1. Mission.
        The Electoral Trust shall impartially administer the Democracy Amendment and the Democracy Act, including the legislative procedures herein, so as to facilitate the exercise of the citizens’ legislative power. The Electoral Trust shall ensure that citizens may file, qualify and vote on initiatives relevant to any government jurisdiction at any time and from any location. The Electoral Trust shall neither influence the outcome of any initiative, nor alter the substance of any initiative, except as specified in Section 3.I, “Deliberative Committee”.
      2. Board of Trustees.
        The Board of Trustees shall establish policy for and perform oversight of the Electoral Trust.

        1. Membership.
          The Board of Trustees shall include 53 members: one member elected by the citizens of each of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Territories of the United States.
        2. Term of Office.
          Members of the Board of Trustees shall serve a single four year term except as follows: Immediately after the first election, the members shall be divided as equally as possible into two classes. The seats of the members of the first class shall be vacated at the expiration of the second year; the seats of the members of the second class shall be vacated at the expiration of the fourth year.
        3. Removal Of Trustees.
          Any member of the Board of Trustees shall be removed from office upon a three-fourths vote of the full membership of the Board of Trustees, or by a majority of the voters participating in a recall election in the political jurisdiction from which the member was elected.
        4. Vacancies.
          A vacancy on the Board of Trustees shall be filled by majority vote of the full membership of the Board of Trustees on candidates who shall represent the political jurisdiction of the Trustee whose seat is vacant. A member appointed to fill a vacancy shall not subsequently be elected to the Board of Trustees.
        5. Meetings.
          The Board of Trustees shall meet at least annually and at such other times and in such places as it deems appropriate to conduct its business. All meetings of the Board shall be publicized in advance and open to the public, except as required by law. The Electoral Trust shall publish the minutes and video recordings of all meetings of the Board, except as required by law.
      3. Interim Board.
        The members of the Interim Board, hereby appointed, are the highest elected official (e.g., Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State) responsible for the conduct of elections from each of the fifty states and Puerto Rico and the highest official responsible for the conduct of elections from the District of Columbia and the Territories of the United States. The responsibility and authority of this initial Board shall be confined to establishing policy and oversight for the registration of each citizen of the United States eligible to vote on an initiative, and establishing policy and oversight for the election of the members of the Board of Trustees.
      4. Director.
        The Director of the Electoral Trust is the Chief Executive Officer of the Electoral Trust and is responsible for its day-to-day management and operations, consistent with the policies established by the Board of Trustees. The Director shall conduct the first election of the Board of Trustees as soon as possible.

        1. Term of Office.
          The Director, except for the first Director, shall be appointed by majority vote of the Board of Trustees. The Director shall serve for a single term of six years. The Board of Directors of The Democracy Foundation shall appoint the first Director.
        2. Removal Of Director.
          The Director shall be removed from office upon a three-fourths vote of the full membership of the Board of Trustees, or by a majority of the voters participating in a national recall election.
        3. Vacancy.
          A vacancy in the position of Director shall be filled by majority vote of the full membership of the Board of Trustees .
      5. Oath or Affirmation of Office.
        Each Member of the Board of Trustees, the Interim Board, the Director and each employee of the Electoral Trust shall execute the following oath or affirmation of office as a condition of his or her service: “I, (name), (swear or affirm) that I will, to the best of my ability, defend and uphold the Constitution of the United States and the sovereign authority of the People to exercise their legislative power.”
      6. Organization and Responsibilities.
        The Electoral Trust shall staff and organize itself to fulfill its mission and shall develop policies, procedures and regulations to register citizens upon their becoming eligible to vote, to assist sponsors in preparing initiatives for qualification, to process initiatives, to administer initiative elections and to administer elections and recall elections of the Board of Trustees and recall elections of the Director. The Electoral Trust may select and contract for facilities and services, and prescribe staff duties and compensation. The Electoral Trust may also apply for and receive funds, and incur debt when necessary, and shall act in a responsible manner as a fiduciary agency of the People.

        1. Existing Law.
          In fulfilling its responsibilities and performing its duties, the Electoral Trust shall comply with applicable laws and regulations of every government jurisdiction of the United States in which it operates that do not conflict with its mission defined in Section 4A, “Mission”. Where laws are in conflict, this Democracy Act shall supersede.
        2. Voter Registration.
          The Electoral Trust shall develop requirements, facilities and procedures for universal lifetime voter registration of citizens of the United States which shall be binding in elections conducted under the authority of the Democracy Amendment and this Act in every government jurisdiction in which a voter is, or may become, a legal resident.
        3. Research and Drafting Service.
          The Electoral Trust shall establish and operate a legislative research and drafting service to assist citizens in preparing initiatives.
        4. Communication.
          The Electoral Trust shall establish the means, procedures and regulations to facilitate the communication of timely, comprehensive, balanced, and pertinent information on the subject matter of each initiative, which information shall be conveyed to the citizens of the relevant jurisdiction by various media, including radio, television, print, and the Internet and/or other electronic media. The Electoral Trust shall establish and maintain a web site for each qualified initiative that will contain, at a minimum, a summary of the Hearing Record, the report of the Deliberative Committee, the result of the Legislative Advisory Vote, statements prepared by the Sponsor, other proponents and opponents, and a balanced analysis prepared by the Electoral Trust of the pros and cons of the initiative, its societal, environmental, and economic implications, costs and benefits.
        5. Hearings and Deliberative Committees.
          The Electoral Trust shall organize a Hearing to receive testimony and shall convene a Deliberative Committee to deliberate on each qualified initiative. The Electoral Trust shall provide or arrange for professional Hearing Officers and Deliberation Facilitators, technical consultants and support staff and facilities as needed for the effective conduct of Hearings and Committee activities.
        6. Elections.
          The Electoral Trust shall devise and administer policies and procedures to conduct elections of initiatives, of the Board of Trustees, and for the recall of any Trustee or the Director. In doing so, it shall take advantage of contemporary technology in developing procedures for voting and validating votes. All such policies and procedures shall be neutral with respect to the content of initiatives administered and the outcomes of elections conducted.
      7. Budgets.
        Budgets covering all elements of the Electoral Trust’s operations and activities shall be prepared and published consistent with government practices and the public nature of the Electoral Trust’s responsibilities.
    5. APPROPRIATIONS.
      The People hereby authorize the appropriation of funds from the Treasury of the United States, pursuant to Article I, Section 9(7) of the United States Constitution, to enable the Electoral Trust to organize itself and begin the performance of its duties. Appropriations shall be made annually to the Electoral Trust as an independent agency of the United States Government.
    6. SEVERABILITY.
      In the event that any one or more of the provisions of this Act shall for any reason be held to be invalid as a result of judicial action, the remaining provisions of this Act shall be unimpaired.
    7. DEFINITIONS.
Administer
Plan, manage and execute the operations of an organization in accordance with governing policy, organizational regulations and pertinent constitutional and statute law.
Appropriation
A legislative act of the U.S. House of Representatives transferring public funds from the United States Treasury, in accordance with Article I, Section 9(7) of the Constitution.
Authorize (an appropriation)
A legislative act to empower or give necessary authority to make an appropriation of public funds from the United States Treasury.
Budget
An itemized summary of anticipated income and intended expenditures for a specified period of time.
Campaign
An operation or related set of operations pursued to accomplish a political purpose. In this context it refers to all of the activities conducted by any citizen or group of citizens together with all the resources applied by them to the goal of enacting or defeating an initiative.
Charter
A document that has been ratified by the people effected to establish and define the fundamental powers and privileges of a governing body for a municipality, county or other corporation..
Chief Executive Officer
The executive with responsibility and authority to plan, manage and conduct the operations of an organization; including the appointment of subordinate managers, hiring of employees, contracting for services, and undertaking or overseeing all other activities necessary to fulfill the mission of the organization subject to policies and guidelines established by the governing board of the organization or other superior authority.
Citizen
A person entitled by birth or naturalization to the protection of a state or nation; in particular, one entitled to vote and enjoy other privileges.
Coerce
To force to act in a certain way by use of pressure, threats, or intimidation.
Deliberation Facilitator
A professional in group processes and the effective conduct of meetings who is made available by the Electoral Trust to assist the citizen members of a Deliberative Committee in the conduct of their deliberations.
Election
In this context, the entire process, and the infrastructure supporting that process, by which votes are cast and tabulated to determine whether or not an initiative has been approved or rejected by the voters; or the process by which votes are cast and tabulated to determine the membership of the Board of Trustees of the Electoral Trust.
File (an initiative)
An initiative is filed when the Sponsor submits the initiative to the Electoral Trust for approval of its Title and Summary.
Government (local, state or national)
A governing body that is defined by and draws its authority from a constitution or charter.
Government Jurisdiction
A geographic area subject to governance by a legislative body. In this context, national, state, county or equivalent (e.g., parish), municipality (e.g., cities and towns), commonwealth (i.e., Puerto Rico) and Trust Territory (i.e., American Samoa, Guam and Virgin Islands), plus the District of Columbia — are the specific jurisdictions referred to and included under the Democracy Act.
Induce
In this context, to lead or move, as to a course of action, by promise of reward or consideration.
Initiative
The legislative instrument chosen by the voting citizens of the United States to exercise their inherent power to enact or modify any governmental policy, law, charter, or constitution; as set forth in the Democracy Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Initiative Process
Infrastructure and procedures by which legislation may be introduced and enacted directly by the people.
Jurisdiction
See “Government Jurisdiction.”
Lawmaker/Legislator
One who makes or enacts laws. In this context, either a member of an elected legislative body such as Congress, a state legislature, or a city council; or a citizen eligible to vote in the Legislature of the People.
Legislation
A legislative resolution or statute law produced by a legislature.
Legislative Advisory Vote
A legally non-binding vote required by the Democracy Act to be taken by the legislative body of the government jurisdiction affected by an initiative, in which the members of the elected legislature publicly vote yea or nay on the initiative. Serves as an advisory or cue to the citizens.
Legislative Body
An elected group of individuals having the power to create, amend and repeal laws together with the policies, procedures and infrastructure established by and under a governing constitution or charter.
Legislative Resolution
A formal expression of the opinion or “will” of a legislative body.
Legislature
An officially elected or otherwise selected body of people vested with the responsibility and power to make laws for a political unit, such as a state or nation.
Legislature of the People
The body of citizens who are eligible to vote in an election conducted by the Electoral Trust, which administers the policies, procedures and infrastructure established by and under the authority of the Democracy Amendment and the Democracy Act.
National Initiative
Short title for the National Initiative For Democracy.
National Initiative for Democracy
The Democracy Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and the Democracy Act, packaged together.
Opponent (of an initiative)
Any person who attempts, by any action, including but not limited to the contribution of funds, services, or other resources to be used for the creation or dissemination of information, to advocate that a qualified initiative be defeated at election.
Petition
In this context, a document in which registered voters indicate that they wish an initiative to be qualified for election. Petitions may be hard copy or electronic documents, and may be signed manually or electronically.
Poll
In this context, a validated sampling of registered voters in which the respondents indicate whether or not they wish an initiative to be qualified for election.
Polling Plan
A document that describes the number and source of respondents; the method by which the respondents for a poll will be drawn; how the data will be collected, tabulated and presented; and how the question(s) on the poll will be worded. The Electoral Trust may require a polling plan to include such additional information as will permit it to carry out its responsibility to determine if the planned poll will accurately reflect the views of the citizens in the government jurisdiction affected by the initiative addressed by the proposed poll.
Proponent (of an initiative)
Any person who attempts, by any action, including but not limited to the contribution of funds, services, or other resources to be used for the creation or dissemination of information, to advocate that a qualified initiative be enacted at election.
Qualify (an initiative)
To qualify for election an initiative must meet criteria established by the Democracy Act, thereby enabling the Electoral Trust to begin the processing of the initiative that leads to its enactment or defeat in an election by registered voters.
Ratify
An act of approval by a sovereign authority.
Registered Voter
In this context, any citizen of the United States who is at least 18 years old, who has registered once in his or her lifetime, is not imprisoned for a felony, and who has not been classified as “incompetent” by a court, provided that he or she has not renounced or otherwise given up United States citizenship.
Signature, Electronic
“Electronic signature” is a generic, technology-neutral term that refers to the result of any of the various methods by which one can “sign” an electronic document. Examples of electronic signatures include: a digitized image of a handwritten signature, a secret code or personal identification number (PIN) (such as are used with ATM cards and credit cards) or a unique biometrics-based identifier, such as a fingerprint or a retinal scan. The Electoral Trust will specify and/or implement electronic signature technology to be used by voters who choose to submit ballots signed electronically.
Signature, Manual
A person’s name or equivalent mark written in the person’s own handwriting.
Sovereign
When used as a noun: one who, singly or in company with others, possesses supreme authority in a nation or other governmental unit. When used as an adjective: self-governing; independent; possessing highest authority and jurisdiction.
Sponsor
A person, or a group of individually identified people, responsible for the submission of an initiative to the Electoral Trust for qualification and processing.
Statute Law
An enactment by a legislative body, e.g., laws, resolutions and ordinances.
The People of the United States
The introductory phrase of the Democracy Act begins with the phrase “Be It Enacted By The People Of The United States.” In this context the term “People of the United States” is used for consistency with our Constitution and Declaration of Independence.
Transparency, Transparent
In general usage: free from guile; candid, open and easily understood. In this context, the term “transparent” refers to the fact that the workings and products of the Electoral Trust are to be continuously public; that is, open to inspection and review by the citizenry except as may be required by law.

Click here to view an annotated version of the Democracy Act.

Posted in Business, Economics, Investment Finance, Monetization, Quantitative Easing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment