Category Archives: Library

Library, Peoples Lobby

‘God’s angry man’ told us so

Leave a comment

Published Marin Independent Journal, October 26, 1994

DWAYNE HUNN

‘God’s angry man’ told us so

Since IT’S NEARING election time, I wandered to Ross Perot’s  Autumn ’94 “Let’s get ’em!” Marin Civic Center rally. Then I went to a Kathleen Brown meeting, where they scrutinize for spies as they manufacture and hand out yard signs. I went because I once did some political stuff.

Whether I worked for brother Jerry Brown or in­troduced George McGovern to a crowd of 15,000, my political work taught me that awe and adulation ain’t deserved for most who play the game. There’s only one political guy I look back on and always up to.

Leading jazz bands was his love. Selling used cars was one of his jobs.

When his car dealership owner went to jail, Ed Koupal threw such a giant “Jail Sale” that Sacramento’s dealers forced Ford to squelch his “marketedly incorrect” but hugely successful gambit. When Reagan cut state budgets by closing homes for the infirm, Ed mounted a recall that stunted Ron’s early presidential aspirations.

When Ed gagged on L.A.’s smog, he formed People’s Lobby, revived the dormant initiative process for grass roots organizations and, with a $9,000 budget, put the Clean Environment Initiative on the 1972 ballot. When big money nuked our efforts to lower the lead content in gasoline, reduce sulfur-dioxide emissions in diesel fuel, ban DDT and stop construction of nuclear reactors, Ed taught us to get even by leading the 1974 Political Reform Initiative to a 70 percent victory.

Common Cause and Jerry Brown joined that crusade. Back then, candidate Jerry didn’t sound like Edwin Koupal.   Today, minus  Ed’s pork-chop sideburns, humor, fun and commanding presence, Jerry often echoes him: “Only Nader deserves to stay in Washington.”

To Ed, political icons weren’t good enough. Once, Ed chewed into Nader: “If you wanna get something done, don’t waste time trying to reform the system or begging politicians to do it right.

‘Write your own damn laws. Recall the bums and put the really_ _ _ _ _ _ ones in jail.”

Nader said, “Show me.” Ed organized Western Bloc, a coalition of 15 initiative states to stop nuclear reactor construction.

Western Bloc instituted the National Initiative, Referendum and Recall (NIR&R) as the 27th (then) amendment to the Constitution. It picked up 55 co­sponsors and support from Jack Kemp and Recall Ronnie. Unfortunately, columnist Tom Wicker was prophetic: “No one need worry, however, about Congress taking plenty of time to study these particular reforms, striking as they do at Congressional power.”

When Ed Koupal, “one of God’s angry men” left for heaven in 1976, most of the 50 “long-haired, crazy and radical People’s Lobby mules” took refuge from a political scene that had lost the only guy they knew deserved awe and adulation. Today, the direct democracy tools he wanted constitutionalized still seem needed.

Some politicians skirt the need, saying, “The initiative process is too complicated for regular folk! A National IR&R would be ghastly!”

“Too complicated” for the regular folks who employ highly paid politicians? If our employees can’t “KISS” (keep it simple, stupid), maybe we ought to add a jazz man’s song score that will at least make them dance.

California’s initiatives are judicially limited to one subject and are generally from two to 20 pages. “Keeping it simple, stupid” is easier in initiatives than in those 1,500-plus-page Congressional omnibus pork bills. Few legislators read those bills. Knowing only generalities, they vote as their specially interested parties dictate.

Democracy ain’t a box of chocolates. Today’s world is harder to chew and digest. So if you’re growling a lot, consider exercising the National Initiative and abiding by the People’s Lobby adage, “Final responsibility rests with the people, therefore never is final authority delegated.”

Dwayne Hunn, a resident of Mill Valley, is working on a book about the National IR&R and will be teaching at the University o[ San Francisco. People’s Lobby‘s mailing address is 5075 Charmian Dr., Santo Rosa 95409.

Library

David Schmidt remembers Koupals

Leave a comment

Schmidt quotes from 1994 interview:

Dwayne Hunn asks questions in bolded print.  Citizen Lawmakers author David Schmidt answers.

Your feeling on the Senate Judiciary Committee National Initiative Hearings in 1977:

“No body had anything to gain by doing it.  No direct benefit to anybody.  When you get it implemented, you don’t win anything.  No gain to any of the politicians.  It’s a procedural reform.  Toughest thing is to get people interested in a procedure.  Politicians are driven by people who want to get something tangible out of the system.  The National Initiative, as a proce­dural reform, is totally intangible. Procedural reforms finish last — especially when the reforms give equal use to you and your opponents.

“The hay day of procedural reform is over.  One of the few people who believes in procedural reform is Ralph Nader.  Nader and he has dozens of other initiatives that he is pushing regularly.  But all practical politicians are all going for immediate goals.  It may be possible for someone like Perot to push this forward.

“Reagan, Bush, Kemp pushed the National Initiative in the 80’s but the media can’t see the value of it.  They’re cynical about anyone who talks of procedural reform.”

Any other reasons the National Initiative didn’t make it in 1977?

“Abourezk wasn’t re-running.  He assigned an intern to gather co-sponsors from the 78 Congress.  His intern got an impressive list of co-sponsors.  The Congress seemed to be say­ing, ‘In this Congress, we’ll push for the National Initiative —- and no one did.’

“John (Forester) and Roger (Telschow) then went into business and sat back to see if Congress would do anything.”

Did you come to the conclusion that Ed, Joyce and People’s Lobby revived the initiative process?

“Ed was center piece of the book. Started with the conclusion that Ed and Joyce and the Lobby revived the initiative process and supported that conclusion with lots of evidence.”

What about the Lobby training others?

“the Lobby focused on training.  PL trained Jarvis and some are still out doing it.”

Have you been dealing with international initiative?

“Recently met the leader of the Green Party from Bavaria.

He came to visit last Friday to talk about the initiative proc­ess.  Working in tradition of Ed Koupal.  In last 8-10 years helped get Hungarian National Initiative.  They have a good initiative process in German states.

How did you start the Citizen Lawmakers book?

“Lived with Roger and John in 1980 and started editing

National Initiative Newsletter in 1983.  Roger and John were constantly telling stories about Ed.  Referring to him as a “genius” one who knew “how to get politicians on the run.”

Library

Roger Telschow remembers

Leave a comment

Roger Telschow on Ed:

Roger ran the Northern Californian PIRG office at Santa Clara.  Ed recruited him while on one of his political crusades.  This is from a January 5, 1994 phone conversation I had with Roger.

“I have fond memories of Ed..” Roger started with and continued by saying, “Citizen Lawmakers by David Schmidt has excellent chapter on Ed…

“Ed convinced me that the only way to get anything done in the country was through the national initiative…

“Kemp was present during the hearings (Senate Judiciary Hearings of 1977) on national initiative.  Months ago I read in US NEWS that Kemp was going to make the National Initiative part of his Presidential Campaign in 96. I have been hearing those rumblings for awhile.”

“Sometimes it just takes longer doesn’t it?” I said.

“Yes, a lot longer,” Roger replied.

“Originally we got him (Kemp) interested during the hearings, and he was one of the co-sponsors…

“We, John Forester and I,  left the crusade in early 80’s.  There was just no money in it.

”Nader soured on John and me… John and I created an office and living space in one of the buildings we bought… One of his staffers lived there with us and John and he had some bad vibes and that seemed to sour Nader’s relation to us. Talked to him 4-5 times since and sensed his coolness… Schmidt worked with him.”

Ed anecdote:

“Once we were in a press conference in Colorado or San Francisco.  These reporters were gathered and Ed went in the room treating them like a bunch of students,  “Okay, guys I got some good stuff for you today…” Ed would say.

“And he carried on about the anti-nuclear initiatives and he would say something important and then say , ‘The last physics I had was XLax…’ and they’d laugh…

“They liked him and when he got ready to give them some serious stuff one of the reporters said, ‘Wait a minute, I got to get a pencil.’ Ed stopped, gaxed at this guy, hung the audience out to dry and said, ‘What?  You’re a reporter and you don’t have a pencil?…   That’s like a prostitute without a pussy….”

“The placed cracked up. They just loved him.  He was great.”

“Ever since meet I Ed getting national initiative passed became my main interest.

“Luckily, my first contact in Washington was Senator  Abourzek of South Dakota.  Walked into his office and told them what we were about and the aide said,  ‘Yeah, I think my boss would be interested in that…’”

Regarding. National Init:

“Haven’t seen anybody yet lay out a strategy to make that happen…

“Perot organization – proposed it to them.   With their national town meeting it seemed like a good fit…  Since then, and I don’t know if I had anything to do with it or not, the National initiative is in their platform…”

Regarding Gravel’s Philadelphia II approach:

“We’re a nation of laws and how do you get around not doing it through the Constitutional amendment route… May be spitting in the wind if set up a major court case to determine if can do it outside of amendment process.  Can you do national initiative through a process that isn’t sanctioned by our laws… Then having the court throw them out?..

 

Library

Lobby Diamond initiated lawsuits

Leave a comment

LAW OFFICES OF

ROGER JON DIAMOND

2115 MAIN STREET

SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA 90405-2215

TELEPHONE (310) 399-3259

FAX (310) 392-9029

September 10, 1993

Dwayne Hunn

359 Jean Street

Mill Valley, CA 94941

Re:       People’s Lobby

Dear Dwayne:

Further to my letter of September 8, 1993, I located a list of People’s Lobby cases. They are as follows:

  1. People’s Lobby v. Joe Gonzalves, LASC No. 104128 (1974);
  1. Fair Political Practices Commission v. Superior Court, 25 Cal.3d 33 (1979);
  1. People’s Lobby v. The MaY Department Stores, LASC No. WEC30641 (1974) ;
  1. People’s Lobby v. Legislature of the State of California, Sacramento Superior Court No. 246263 (1974);
  1. Los Anaeles County-Fair Association v. People’s Lobby, LASC No. EAC112O5 (1970) ;
  1. People’s Lobby v. Board of Supervisors, 30 Cal.App.3d 869 (1973) ;
  1. People’s Lobby v. Post, California Supreme Court No. SAC79 37;
  1. People’s Lobby v Ed Reinecke, LASC No. CA000l5l (1974);
  1. People’s Lobby v. Ed Reinecke, LASC No. WEC25264 (1972);
  1. Helena Rubenstin International v. Younger, 71 Cal.App.3d 406 (1977) ;
  1. People’s Lobby v. Younger, LASC No. 98983 and Second Civil No. 45770 (Court of Appeal);
  1. Peo~1e’s Lobby v. Standard Oil Company, LASC No. 024291 (1972) ;
  1. People’s Lobby v. Public Utilities Commission, 76 PUC 414 (1974);
  1. People’s Lobby v. Texaco, L~.SC No. 984102 (1970);
  1. People’s Lobby v. Younger, California Supreme Court No. SF23174 (1974)
  1. People’s Lobby v. Younger, LASC No. 98983;
  1. Kou~al v. Rosales, LASC No. 0138728;
  1. Kou~a1 v. Los Angeles Air Pollution Control District, USDC, Central District of California No. 70-92—FW (1970);
  1. Danielson v. Alioto, San Francisco Superior Court No. 680381 and 680369 (1974) ;
  1. Diamond v. Bland, 3 Cal.3d 653 (1970) and 11 Cal.3d 331 (1974)

If you would like to discuss these cases in detail with me please let me know.

Sincerely,

ROGER JON DIAMOND

RJD:jb

Library

Roger Diamond remembers

Leave a comment

LAW OFFICES OF

ROGER JON DIAMOND

2115 MAIN STREET

SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA 90405-2215

TELEPHONE 1310) 399-3259

FAX 13101 392-9029

 September 8, 1993

Dwayne Hunn

359 Jean Street

Mill Valley, CA 94941

Re:       People’s Lobby

Dear Dwayne:

Thank you for your letter of August 19, 1993. It did not arrive until September 2, 1993 by fax.

I would like to help you in any way I can. I think that your project is extremely worthwhile and will be quite a tribute to Ed and Joyce.

With respect to your 22 questions, I will briefly answer them now but I can give more detailed responses should you choose to interview me.

First, I met Ed and Joyce in 1968 or 1969 shortly after they ran the recall Reagan campaign. They had run a statewide recall measure designed to recall Governor Ronald Reagan. I had just helped begin an organization known as the Clean Air Council. had suggested to the Clean Air Council that we run a statewide initiative to stop air pollution.

Ed and Joyce heard about the Clean Air Council and our plans to do an initiative and we combined forces because of Ed and Joyce’s experience in doing a statewide petition.

I drafted the Clean Environment Act Initiative Petition and we began circulating it in 1969. We wanted to qualify it in time for the June 1970 ballot. I was one of the official proponents of the measure.

Ed, Joyce, and I had circulators out at numerous establishments including shopping centers.

A volunteer circulator, William Duxler, was ordered to leave the Inland Center in San Bernardino on October 30, 1969. The shopping center claimed he was trespassing on private property. I prepared and filed a lawsuit on November 5, 1969 against the Sheriff of San Bernardino County, Frank Bland and numerous other defendants, including the shopping center owner. I went to San Bernardino and sought a temporary restraining order from Judge Haberkorn on November 5, 1969.

He denied the TRO but set it down for preliminary injunction hearing on November 14, 1969. On that day I had just completed my first jury trial and while the jury was deliberating in East Los Angeles, I drove to San Bernardino in time for the 1:30 court appearance. At that time I argued the shopping center case. Judge James E. Cunningham, an ex State Senator heard the case and denied the injunction.

I appealed to the California Court of Appeal on an expedited basis. On May 25, 1970, the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment of the Superior Court that we had no right of access. then petitioned the State Supreme Court for review.

Incidentally, the initiative campaign failed in January of 1970. However, we planned another initiative for the 1972 ballot.

At the same time, I was a candidate for State Assembly. I won the June 1970 primary and was on the ballot for November 2, 1970.

I went to Sacramento on November 3, 1970, the day I lost the general election, to argue the case before the Supreme Court. Because United Airlines lost my luggage, I had to argue the case in a borrowed suit. It was my first argument before the Supreme Court.

I began the argument by telling the Court that we needed a speedy decision because the People’s Lobby was planning to do another initiative and we needed to get access to shopping centers right away. Chief Justice Donald Wright leaned over and told me that they always decide their cases quickly.

In any event, the California Supreme Court on December 16, 1970 reversed the lower courts and ruled that we did have a right to go on to shopping centers to get other signatures. It was a landmark ruling.

With access to shopping centers guaranteed by the Diamond v. Bland decision, People’s Lobby proceeded to circulate and qualify the Clean Environment Act Initiative for the June 1972 election.

I again ran for State Assembly and won the primary in June of  1972.  Unfortunately, the Clean Environment Act, which qualified for the ballot (Proposition 9) was defeated.

We then decided that we wanted to do political reform before we tried to solve the environmental mess and we returned to the streets with the Political Reform Act which qualified for the 1974 ballot and which won. Proposition 9 became law.

I had not been politically active prior to the People’s Lobby.

Indeed, it was in January 1970 when I was speaking to the Santa Monica Democratic Club to support the initiative that was then being circulated, the Santa Monica Democratic Club suggested that I run for State Assembly. Thus, it was the People’s Lobby at work itself that got me involved in politics.

With respect to my participation in the People’s Lobby, it remained. I testified before United States Senate Committee on the national initiative.

Ed and Joyce were truly wonderful people to work with. Our greatest ability was the ability to move quickly. We were not a bureaucratical organization. Ed, Joyce, and I could decide matters very quickly. We had a great ability to get to court on a moments notice.

We took the question of whether Ed Reinecke was disqualified from holding office by virtue of his perjury conviction to the Supreme Court in a matter of days. Ed was very charismatic and Joyce was very thoughtful and helpful.

I remember Ed debating the President of the State Chamber of Commerce on statewide television just prior to the 1972 election regarding the Clean Environment Act.

The most disappointing thing was losing the 1972 election and the most gratifying was winning the 1974 Political Reform Act Initiative.

I would like to offer additional thoughts and memories but time does not permit. I would be glad to sit for a lengthy interview and give you my thoughts and memories in more detail.

There are countless People’s Lobby cases you have not mentioned in your letter to me. You reviewed most of the appellate court decisions but there were numerous other cases that you should mention in any book you are writing.

I would be glad to send you a list or discuss that if you should come down to Los Angeles.

Keep up the good work. I hope you complete the project.

Sincerely,

ROGER JON DIAMOND

RJD:jb

Library

LA’s tribute to Joyce

Leave a comment

City of Los Angeles

IN TRIBUTE

THE LOS ANGELES CITY COUNCIL EXTENDS ITS

DEEPEST SYMPATHY TO YOU IN THE PASSING OF

YOUR LOVED ONE

JOYCE KOUPAL

IN WHOSE MEMORY

ALL MEMBERS STOOD IN TRIBUTE AND REVERENCE

AS THE COUNCIL ADJOURNED ITS MEETING OF MARCH 31, 1992.

Library

Joyce’s rebuttal I&RR

Leave a comment

PEOPLE’S LOBBY, INC

          1500 7th Street #7B

          Sacramento, CA 95814

          (916) 443-7508

March 4, 1986

RE:    “Reform” of the Initiative Process—a Discussion

BY:    Joyce Koupal, Executive Director

As many of you know, the initiative process is under  legislative attack  in California. Many of the “reforms” proposed  by the legislature  are also suggested in an article recently  published by  the  IAR.

Initiative & Referendum Report

Patrick B. McGuigan, Editor

721 Second Street, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20002

Re: Analysis and Critique of Larry Berg and CB Holman’s  overview of the initiative process in California entitled “The  Initiative Process  and  Its  Declining Agenda-Setting  Value”,  March  1986 issue.

Berg  and Holman begin their essay from a mistaken  prem­ise.  The initiative process is not . . . “a ‘people’s check’  on the political agenda produced by representatives.. . .” That  is the function of the -referendum- process.

The  other important point is that instead of  making  it even harder for those who are frozen out of the initiative  proc­ess  by high prices and the other points so impressively made  by Berg  and Holman – why not simply -REDUCE Initiatives signatures BY AT LEAST 50%-. Along with that it would help to legislate  the right  of citizens to gather signatures in public access  places, such as shopping centers.

The important thing to remember is that when one side of  a political stripe seems to be dominating the use of the  initia­tive process it really means that the other side should be  exam­ining  why they have left the field of struggle.  Abolishing  the other  side is not the answer to the problem, especially when  we live  in a “democracy”. Berg and Holman should examine what hap­pened  to the political parties in California when  we abolished cross-filing,  something that should have accomplished what Berg

and Holman seem to want (rejuvenated political parties).

Thank you,

Joyce Koupal

Ex Director

*”THE  SIGNATURE REQUIREMENT FOR Initiatives, geographic  “distribution” of petition signatures, limitations on initiative subject matter,  indirect initiative, shorter referendum  and  initiative ballots,  cooling-off  periods for  initiatives  previously considered,  and signature thresholds. If such oppressive  “reforms” succeed, they will silence the people and bring temporary comfort to the established power structure.

The  IAR  article uses a series of so-called facts  and  data  to establish reasons why the initiative process should be “reformed” out of existence. It issues a call to business to make “reform” a top  priority  of their public affairs departments.  The article provides  an  excellent opportunity to discuss the  issues  being raised  by  the enemies of the initiative  process.  I  therefore submit my comments to you and welcome your criticism.

I&RR CONTENDS: *People’s  admitted  ignorance  supports:

No. 1. Voters like the concept of the initiative process, but are concerned about the specifics.

No. 2. A high percentage of voters admit they  do not understand the initiative process-.

*People’s supports on of early initiative history indicates that the people of California  clearly under­stood  the power and use of the process. Because they became so skilled, enemies of the initiative process in the 1940s, in  the form  of liquor lobbyist Artie Samish, obtained passage  of  “re­form”  legislation. The initiative process was virtually lost to the  people  of California for almost thirty years.  As late as 1969, professional signature gathering firm president Joe Robin­son bragged to initiative proponents that, “If you don’t hire me, your initiative  won’t  qualify.” So, for the  rich,  who could afford  to  pay, the initiative process was  a  viable  political tool.  For the great body of citizen activists,  the  initiative process was beyond their budgets

While the initiative process lay fallow, the power structure  was using it.  For those, who could afford to pay, the initiative process was  a viable political tool. For the great body of citizen activists, the initiative process was beyond their budgets.  For them it was non-existent.  Initiatives were given one line  in  California  text books  and,  over  the next few years, that line  was  gradually expanded to a chapter on history.

In order to encourage and teach others to use the process,  Peo­ple’s Lobby speakers appeared on high school and college campuses nationwide. PLI (People’s Lobby Incorporated) wrote, printed and distributed millions of pieces of educational material about the process. In 1975, PLI published a  compendium on all known initiative information, and,  in  1976 published  — Direct Democracy-. It had become clear that not one book in the entire country, dealing exclusively with the  initia­tive, recall and referendum processes, existed.

It’s  been fifteen years since PLI broke down the roadblocks  for using  the process and initiative information in our  educational system still doesn’t exist. How can people know what they are not taught or cannot find out about on their own?

Organized groups are — using —  the initiative process — not studying non-existent information. These groups are receiving what little technical  information  is  available  by  paying  professionals, piecemeal from other action groups, or, through practical experi­ence. Whether paying professionals or learning “the hard way”, it is an expensive and time consuming process.

Action  oriented  groups, with little or no  training,  can  make mistakes or use the initiative process in ways that anger others. It  is wrong to punish the initiative process because such  prob­lems may exist.

I&RR CONTENDS:

No. 3. The initiative is no cure-all for what ails democracy.  Supporters of a national  initiative process  base their feelings in large measure  on the Swiss experience with direct democracy and believe a  national initiative is a “quick fix” for  democratic  ailments such as low voter turnouts.-

*Attack on the national initiative proposal

I  don’t know any national initiative proponent who believes  the Swiss experience can provide a standard for the  United  States, Switzerland  still hasn’t given women full voting rights.  It  is difficult,  however,  to  study initiatives  without  discussing Switzerland; the process started there.

Proponents  have  contended that more voters turn  out  and  vote during a controversial initiative campaign. Statistics tend  to support  that  position. When you take +all  ballot  measures  on average+, as IARs statistics do, then the trend is less votes  on issues than for candidates. Supporting a predisposed position by using “numbers games” is a tactic often used by our enemies.

There is nothing sinister about a national initiative process; it is  a civilized way to address grievances. A national  initiative is  a  natural  extension of voting rights.  Starting  from only propertied  men voting, to most men, to black men, to  women,  to eighteen-year-olds,  voting rights have been extended.  Abolition of poll taxes, voting directly for United States Senators, post-card registration, and many other reforms have further  extended voting,

I&RR CONTENDS:

No. 4. The presence of the initiative does not necessarily +increase+ voter turnout in the state that use the process.

No. 5. Many voters who do go to the polls decline the opportunity to vote in  the states  that  use  the process.

 

Library

LETTER TO LEAGUE OF VOTERS

Leave a comment
LETTER TO LEAGUE OF VOTERS/BETTY TROTTER 11/18/83

PEOPLE’S LOBBY, INC.

2315 DURANT #405, BERKELEY, CA 94704

(4l5) 540-0466

We find in Governor Hiram Johnson’s inaugural address in 1911 the words that best described our understanding of the initiative and recall processes:

“. . . When with your assistance, California’s government shall be composed only of those who recognize one sovereign         and master, the people, then is presented to us the question of how best we can arm the people to protect themselves             hereafter?

“If we can give to the people the means by which they may accomplish such other reforms as they desire, the means as          well by which they may prevent the misuse of the power  temporarily centralized in the Legislature and admonitory  and precautionary measures which will ever be present before weak officials, and the existence of which will prevent the  necessity for their use, then all that lies in our power  will have been done in the direction of safeguarding the   future and for the perpetuation of the theory upon which we ourselves shall conduct this government.

“This means for accomplishing other reforms has been  designated the ‘Initiative and Referendum,’ and the  precautionary measure by which a recalcitrant official can be removed is designated the ‘Recall.’ And while I do not by any means believe the Initiative, the Referendum and the  Recall are the panacea for all our political ills, yet they  do give to the electorate the power of action when desired, and they do place in the hands of the people the means by  which they may protect themselves. I recommend to you,              (legislature) therefore, and I most strongly urge, that the first step in our design to preserve and perpetuate popular  government shall be the adoption of the Initiative, the  Referendum and Recall. . . .”

“. . . Suffice it to say, so far as the Recall is concerned,        did the solution of the matter rest with me, I would apply          it to every official. I commend to you the proposition that,        after all, the Initiative and the Referendum depend on our          confidence in the people and in their ability to govern. The        opponents of direct legislation and the Recall, however they        may phrase their opposition, in reality believe the people          cannot be trusted. On the other hand, those of us who               espouse these measures do so because of our deep-rooted             belief in popular government, and not only in the right of          the people to govern, but in their ability to govern; and           this leads us logically to the belief that if the people   have the right, the ability and the intelligence to elect,          they have, as well, the right, ability and intelligence to          reject or recall; and this applies with equal force to an           administrative or Judicial officer.

“. . . Were we to do nothing else during our term of office         than to require and compel an undivided allegiance to the           State from all its servants, and then to place in the hands         of the people the means by which they could continue that           allegiance, with the power to legislate for themselves when         they desired, we would have thus accomplished perhaps the           greatest service that could be rendered our State. With             public servants whose sole thought is the good of the State,        the prosperity of the State is assured, exaction and                extortion from the people will be at an end, in every               material aspect advancement will be ours, development and           progress will follow as a matter of course, and popular             government will be perpetuated.”

The following is People’s Lobby proposal for a National Initiative Process:

PROPOSED 27TH AMENDMENT*

“NATIONAL INITIATIVE—We, the people of the United States of America reserve to themselves the power of the initiative. The initiative is the power of the electors to propose laws and to adopt or reject them. An initiative measure may not be submitted to alter or amend the constitution of the United States.

“VOTE OF CONFIDENCE (RECALL)—Every elected officer of the United States may be removed from office at any time by the  electors meeting the qualification to vote in his state through the procedure and in the manner herein provided for,  which procedure shall be known as a vote of confidence, and is in addition to any other method of removal provided by  law.”

*In implementing this amendment, limitations on the amount of money spent to qualify each process should be built in and also limitations on money spent/donations in campaigns. In the vote of confidence procedure a president should be replaced by succession. Other federal officers should be replaced by caretaker appointments. A caretaker appointee should not be a candidate for that office, for at least one full term. The initiative should be on the national ballot. A vote of confidence should always be a special election.

Ralph Nader said in his column printed November 27, 1974

“. . . One way a democracy withers away is by excessive delegation of citizen rights and powers to remote and unaccountable business and government bureaucracies. To the extent that special interest groups buy, rent, misuse or manipulate elected or appointed government officials, democracy is overridden. . . . The revival of the initiative, referendum and recall in states which provide for them, the passage of similar measures in other states, and the adoption of a national initiative and recall would reduce citizen apathy and quicken citizen involvement in public matters.”

 

Library, Peoples Lobby

Dear Ones

Leave a comment

(Joyce Koupal’s “Dear Ones” letters to her children. Joyce shares some of the secrets of their successes and passes her loving thoughts on to her children.)

April 28, 1983

Dear Ones:

I know this is unsolicited, but  I have thought  for a long time that the following material was worth talking about.

This will be, of course, a rough draft.  I know you have heard most of this from time to time, but probably never in a structured way .

I hope it works for you if you decide it is worth you effort.  I will continue to work on the other parts as I can and send those parts along to you.  Please feel free to comment, I want to hear from you.

FIFTEEN  LAWS OF SUCCESS

  1. Definite Chief Aim
  2. Self-Confidence
  3. Habit of Saving
  4. Initiative & Leadership
  5. Imagination
  6. Enthusiasm
  7. Self-Control
  8. Habit of Doing More Than Paid For
  9. Pleasing Personality
  10. Accurate Thinking
  11. Concentration
  12. Cooperation
  13. Profiting by Failure
  14. Tolerance
  15. Practicing the Golden Rule

THE MASTER MIND

A Master Mind may be created through the bringing together or blending, in a spirit    of perfect   harmony, of two or more minds.  Out of this harmonious blending the chemistry of the mind creates a third mind WHICH MAY BE APPROPRIATED AND USED BY ONE OR ALL OF THE INDIVIDUAL MINDS.  The Master Mind remains available as long as the friendly, harmonious alliance between the individual minds exists.  It will disintegrate and all evidence of its former existence will disappear the moment the friendly alliance is broken. (Laws of Success by Napoleon Hill)

These simple words were the keys to the success of People’s Lobby.  Ed’s death broke the Master Mind that we were operating with.

Faith, Carol and I  put one together for the printing   business but Faith’s negativity never allowed us to realize the full potential of the Master Mind.  Anyone can work on their personal development and strive to create a Master Mind group. It takes a lot of discipline.

HISTORY

When Ed and I met, his energy, enthusiasm and drive, carried me into his plans and goals.  We went together for a year and then were engaged for another year.  During that time we bought ten acres of land and started building our home.  We started developing a chicken ranch.  When we married, we held down five jobs between us.  I worked for the state days and evenings.  Ed worked on a chicken ranch days, worked as a stationary engineer at the brick yard nights and late afternoons we packed eggs on my father’s ranch together.  We bought a little donut shop and then traded our ten acres for a full line bakery.  We worked twenty hours a day, allowing only one hour for sleep in the morning and one hour for sleep at night.  We ended up in bankruptcy.  We went out to my father’s ranch and lived in the hired man’s quarters.  Ed worked on the ranch and we gradually regained our perspective.  The attorney that handled our bankruptcy became a partner in our new business venture – a beer bar, and we bought a new house.  I stayed home and looked after the kids and Ed worked long hours in the bar.  Our fine new partner swindled us out of the  business.  We were again broke and on the street, having lost our home along with the business.  We had always worked with enthusiasm, drive, determination tenacity and very hard work – and we always failed.

This was the lowest point in our lives.  We had no money, the heat had been turned off in the house and we were being foreclosed.  There was no food and we were too proud to ask for help from our relatives.  Ed got a job selling pots and pans door-to-door.  I went with him on his first call and he made the sale and got a small deposit.  We used that deposit money to buy some food and take it home to feed the kids.  Ed had to make that sale because we would not have had enough gas in the car to even get home.  We didn’t realize it. but this was the turning point in our lives.  We were never to fail again.

Wing Torn was the district manager for Presto Pride, the company that Ed went to work for that fateful day.  Door-to-door sales, and pots and pans, are the hardest training ground that any salesman can go through.  It was, and probably still is, the bottom of the barrel.  But Wing Tom believed in the power of positive thinking and he took that several steps further.  His sales meetings were study groups and we were encouraged to read a number of books having to do with the powers of the mind and discuss these books at our meetings.  You see, Ed dragged me into this process with him kicking and screaming.  I didn’t want to knock on doors, I didn’t want to sell pots and pans.  And, I didn’t do much selling, probably because I hated it so.  But I did learn Wing Tom’s secrets and Ed and I began to  put these secret into practice in our own lives.

MEDITATION

We must start at the beginning and that means that one must put the mind into a receptive place.  Meditation, at  least two times a day, calms the mind. refreshes the body and generates an inner strength.

Find a quiet comfortable place.  That might mean that you lock your office door and turn off the light.  Try to find a chair that is comfortable if you can’t find a couch.  Close your eyes.  Take a deep breath and then deliberately, work on slowing your breathing by design.  Mentally tell yourself to relax.  Then, starting with some part of the body, usually your toes, think about relaxing until you feel that part slowly letting go.  Move on to the ankle and go through the same process until you feel the ankles letting go and then move on to the leg.  Slowly go through every part of your body until you feel soft and floating.  You should feel yourself slipping into an almost sleep.  You are slow and clumsy at first, but if you go through this process twice a day you can become very competent and put yourself into a relaxed state and out in about five minutes.  You will feel refreshed and ready for action.  The five minute relaxation process will replace two hours of nap time.

DOING TO OTHERS

Essential to the discipline of success is the ability to train yourself in many new skills.  Power of positive thinking, self esteem, leadership and many other parts of success follow from eliminating all the negatives in your own selves.

One way to start -training yourself to think positively is to begin to think only in a positive way about everyone and everything around you.  Write a list of your associates and friends.  Write down all of the good things you can think of about these people.  In your present negative/positive mind it  may be hard to find good things to say.  But even if it is only one line, write it down.  Do the same thing with the things and locations around you.

Now for the hard part.  From today forward, every time you think about these people, or talk to them, you must put away the negative thoughts and only say or think positive things.   You must do the same thing for the things and locations around you.  You will find yourself slipping into a negative reply or negative comment.  You must listen to yourself, stop yourself, and change right there into the positive.  This is difficult and takes a while.  But the rewards are immense.  You are retraining yourself for success.  What you put out comes back to you a hundred  fold.

After a while, you will begin to- notice that there is a response to what you are doing.  I remember that Ed and I eventually realized that we were in perfect harmony – that we tried to describe as  “peace of mind. “  We were still in some difficulty  – work rig our way out  of our financial problems – but somehow it didn’t seem important anymore.   I went to work for Aerojet and Ed was selling cars.  We bought another house, a little house by the Sacramento airport.  We started moving up.

MORE LATER

Well this is the beginning.  I hope you like it.  I  will appreciate your comments.  This is the first rough draft of what I hope will be a full paper worthy of someone’s attention.

Love  and kisses to you.  Hope to see you very soon.

Mom

Ma 7, 1983

Dear Ones:

Chapter two of my advice to you.  I hope that you have thought about what I said in my previous letter.  I have already found some problems. I hope that you will let me know what you have found in putting this information to use.

This material is in rough draft form.  I know that I do not write very well.  I am open to how you feel about this material.  I will probably be making my career out of this process, so it is important to you and me.

I hope it works for you.  Whether you decide it is worth you personal effort, I will continue to work on the other parts as I can and send those parts along to you.

FIFTEEN LAWS OF SUCCESS

  1. Definite Chief Aim
  2. Self-Confidence
  3. Habit of Saving
  4. Initiative & Leadership
  5. Imagination
  6. Enthusiasm
  7. Self-Control
  8. Habit of Doing More Than Paid For
  9. Pleasing Personality
  10. Accurate Thinking
  11. Concentration
  12. Cooperation
  13. Profiting by Failure
  14. Tolerance
  15. Practicing the Golden Rule

THE MASTER MIND

A Master Mind may be created through the bringing together or blending, in a spirit of perfect harmony, of two or more minds.  Out of this harmonious blending the chemistry of the mind creates a third mind WHICH MAY BE APPROPRIATED AND USED BY ONE OR ALL OF THE INDIVIDUAL MINDS.  The Master Mind remains available as long as the friendly, harmonious alliance between the individual minds exists.  It will disintegrate and all evidence of its former existence will disappear the moment the friendly alliance is broken. (Laws of Success b Napoleon Hill)

RELAXATION (Incorrectly labeled meditation)

A more correct definition of this process  is relaxation.  Moderation in all things is a by word for this entire process.  You don’t have to become a Yogi to start working on your mind to receive my information.  Two five or ten minute relaxation periods per day over several weeks or months will do wonders for your concentration.  See number 11 law.  You will also be able to use this relaxation to rejuvenate yourself when you are stressed, or have to work long hours.  So this process serves a two-fold purpose.  Let me know how you are doing  on this.

DEFINITE CHIEF AIM

You may already have this securely cemented in your mind.  If you do, you are one lucky person.  What do you want from life? Where are you going to be and what are you going to be doing 10 years from now, 15 years, or 20? Or do you even know what you want from life 5 years ahead or even one year? Only you can decide.

You may have guessed, your father did know exactly where he was going.  His definite chief aim?  “To be a leader of many people.” The story of how he arrived at that aim may not have been something you have heard about.  He only talked of it a few times with me.  It was so crazy that most of the time he didn’t quite believe it all happened to him. But I remember his buddies talking about it really happening, and his army discharge was unusual (but real).  I’ll try to remember the story as he told it.

Ed was a musician.  He started out playing the trombone and late changed to the bass.  He had a “black” beat, so described to me by many black musicians.  He played with black groups.  Highly unusual during the forties as most of the country was segregated and of course very prejudiced.  But that didn’t stop your dad.  He always did what he wanted and never cared or thought about what other people thought of what he did.  This is an important difference.  One that you must cultivate and nurture in your own lives.  If you are ever to become a leader and develop initiative in your lives, you must give up the curbing of your decisions because of what others might think about that.  If you have accurate thinking (see 10 law), a definite chief aim (#l),   you will be making decisions and moving toward that aim and it will be correct for you.

At any rate, back to the story.  Ed was drafted into the army and, because he was a musician, was classified critically essential to the war effort.  Ed didn’t like the Army, he wanted to play music and play at having a great time in life.  Stationed finally in Texas, he was doing his duty daytimes, and playing jazz in the local town at night with a small combo made up of his Army buddies.  Most of these musicians were black.  In this town there was a small black church.  According to Ed’s buddies, miracles were known to happen in this church.  The congregation was made of  a black sect known as The Seven Sisters.  Don’t ask me any more about this, it is just what I remember Ed telling me.  At any rate, a member of this group was supposed to be able to heal people, foretell ones future, and do other kinds of things.  Somehow, Ed met this person and told him that his chief aim in life was “to get out of the Army as quickly as possible.” This person said that it was possible.   But that Ed would have to follow exact instructions.  Ed could not remember exactly what he had to do, but remembered that at a certain time of day he had to recite a passage out of the bible.  When a superior officer gave him an order, he was to clutch a “root” in his pocket, and quietly but firmly, refuse to obey.  He remembered that he was scared to death the first time he tried it, because he could have been court martialed or worse.  But, try it he did.  And, according to him, NOTHING HAPPENED.  He was not brought  up on charges, simply nothing happened.

This went on for several days or weeks.  Ed was getting impatient and went to see this person, and asked when all of this was going t o pay off with his discharge.  At this time in history, it took at least six weeks for someone to be “mustered out” of the Army.  That is, for someone who was NOT critically essential as Ed was, and someone who had served out his entire commitment of two or three years, these people could get out in six weeks.  Ed was told that if this was Friday night, he could expect to be completely discharged from the service by five pm the following Monday afternoon.  And, according to your  dad, that is exactly what happened.  Early Monday morning the Sergeant called him in and said, “You are critically essential, this is impossible, you can’t get out for six weeks at least, but go see the doctor,  you are being discharged.”  All through the day, each person he had to see told him the same thing.  And, at 5 pm that day, your father walked off the base a free man.  His discharge (and this is true) was a 501(c)(3) meaning that it was honorable, with all benefits due him, but if he ever wanted to get BACK into the Army, the Adjutant General of the United States had to give him the permission to do so.

Imagine if you will what our political enemies would  have done with that story if they had known.

At any rate, Ed was a free man.   He went to see the person from the church to thank him, and while he was there, that person told him that  he foresaw that Ed would “be a leader of many people” during his life.  Ed really struggled with this experience for many years.  He had had such a strong mind that it  was difficult for him to accept the fact that he had not only seen but been part of an occult type of thing.  He said many times that he didn’t believe in this experience, but he really held in the back of his mind those words “you will be a leader of many people.”  I didn’t realize it but I bought into his goal in life and we set out.  That is, we set out once we acquired the skills to do so through this process that I am relating to you.

And, didn’t he realize his secret goal? I now know that it is true.  And I think that is why he could die so peacefully.  He had attained his goal in life.   He “had it made”.

Well, you may not find your goal in life as easily or unusually as your father did, but find your goal you must.  One of the real and terrible problems of young people today is that you don’t have a goal in life.  People who lived through hard times rise up with definite ideas about what they don’t want and many times a clear goal of what they do want. They get the honing of purpose from a hard experience. Times have been too good.  But that doesn’t mean you  have to suffer to set goals.  But you must sit down and do some very serious thinking about it.  You must find out  what you want and  it must be real.  Then you will be able to  work out the steps you must take to get to your goal.

A word of warning.  That doesn’t mean that you will have a clear path to your goal.  There may be sidetracks and unusual paths you  will have to take to get to where you want to go.  But go you will!

IMAGERY

It might help to get a big piece of paper and put it on you wall. Add some pictures of those things you want.  Money? A car? A house?  A family? A friend? A telephone call?  A letter? Whatever it is, paste it on the paper.  A picture in front of every, will help you imagine that it is a real part of  your life.  Sit down and look at this picture.  Play your relaxation game.  Then imagine yourself with this “thing” that you have in your goal picture.  See yourself holding it, touching it, putting it in your  pocket, living it, whatever.  Do this at least once a day.  It does help to put it in your life, then you will not rest until you really have it  in  hand.

YOU ARE THE ONLY THING BETWEEN YOURSELF AND THE THINGS YOU WANT

This means exactly that.    How many time have you said to yourself, “I would do, it but . . . “.   “I would do it but . . .”  The “but” is your way of excusing yourself out  of success and attainment.  You but yourself  and then you don’t have to take  a chance or stick your neck out where others can see you fail.  I know this is true because when your father and I finally “went for it,”  we stripped ourselves  of all “worldly” goods and put ourselves in position where we had “-nothing to lose.” That was our way of handling our own “buts.”  Arid it worked for us.  That is because we viewed “viewed  “worldly goods” as important.  In order to “go for it” you do not have to give up worldly goods.  You simply have to stop letting the “buts” have their way with you.  Free yourself systematically from the “buts” in your life.  Do this consciously.  Now you know.  Now you can deal with it.

Want to be rich in money? You have to let go of the “but” if I  get rich ‘L won’t know what to do with my money? Or “but” others will  want to take   it away from me,  or “but” I really don’t deserve to be rich.   Or “but” I’ll have to, give up all my friends who really like me because they can feel sorry for me.  Etc.  Etc.  Etc.  You fill in the blanks.

Perhaps the biggest   one of all is “But” if I am rich  I’ll have to take charge of my own life and be responsible for me.  It is easier -to be a failure with all of those connotations.

Yes, I am guilty of all of this too.  But, I  am taking steps to  do something about it again.

HABIT OF DOING MORE THAN PAID FOR

Let’s talk about this one a bit.  The extra inch (or foot) in your work is very important.  It makes the important difference between “doing your job and collecting your money” and “doing you job and developing your opportunities.” When you hear someone say, “People don’t know how to work,” doing the job and collecting the money is usually the problem.  When someone has put everything they have into developing a business, they want to rely on staff that cares about what happens to that business.  One way you can graphically demonstrate your concern is to go the extra step.  The person who shows up on time, or is early for his jobs is the person who gets noticed by the boss. Developing your job, by giving it extra time and care, is rewarded by climbing the ladder of success.  Sometimes that is not true.  But because this process does not work with everyone you come into contact with, does not mean you should stop.  The truth is that if you are working toward your own life goal, you are really going the extra step for yourself.  And, by and large, you will see enormous benefits come back to you for your efforts.

Your dad and I used to say that we succeeded because we were willing and able to, work 24 hours a day to gain our ends.   The political community we were battling went home at five.  I know that part of that is true, but another element went into our success that meant we could not fail – The Master Mind.  At any rate, we always did put in that extra work, be it for an, employer or for ourselves.  The habit stuck because we had made it a habit in our lives.

Well, so much for a second round in my narrative.  I wish you well in your quest for knowledge.  I hope that this will help you on the road to your goal in life.  Let me know if it helps.  I love you.

Mom

Library

Case for Law by Initiative

Leave a comment
The Washington Post,  Friday, January 20, 1978

 

Roger Telschow

The Case for Law by Initiative

Just 58 years ago, American women were still denied the right to vote. Fighting to the last, opponents of wo­men’s suffrage no doubt argued that this constitutional change ran contrary to all the wisdom of the Constitution’s framers. After all, they argued, if women were supposed to vote, the right would have been granted by our forefathers in the 18th century.

It is now 1978 and the same faulty logic is advanced (in an op-ed column by Michael Malbin on Jan. 7) to oppose the right of Americans to vote on fed­eral issues.

The proposal in question is the Voter Initiative Amendment, sponsored by James It. Jones (D-Okla.) and Harold S. Sawyer R-Mich.) in the House, and James Abourezk (D-S.D.) and Mark O. Hatfield (R-Ore.) in the Senate. It would give citizens the power to place pro­posed laws on the national ballot, after petitioning about 2% million registered voters. A majority vote would directly enact the proposal into law.

Malbin’s main opposing argument — ‘ that the framers didn’t provide for initiative, so why should we? — is somewhat shortsighted, to say the !east.  The fact is, the framers failed to include many rights in the original Constitu­tion, not the least of which were voting privileges for over half  the adult popu­lation. To quote noted constitutional scholar Arthur S. Miller on the subject, “The Constitution has never been inter­preted in ways to give sole authority to the views of the Founding Fathers, even if those views are ascertainable; usually, they are not.”

Continuing this testimony, delivered to a Senate Judiciary subcommittee, Miller said, “I fully support [the Voter Initiative Amendment] and believe that its adoption by the Congress and three-fourths of the state legislatures would be a salutary and. progressive addition to the Constitution.”

Far from being a radical idea, public votes on policy questions have tradi­tionally played a key role in American government. In most states, school taxes, bond issues and state constitutional amendments are considered too important to enact without a public vote.

Initiative has an impressive track record in the 23 states now authorizing its use.  According to research done by the Library of Congress, in the 80 years of initiative use some 1200 issues have been voted on. Many landmark reforms were pioneered by initiative. Direct election of senators, abolishment of poll taxes, workmen’s compensation, and tax and political reform are just a few of the issues tackled by voters at the ballot box, in the face of an unre­sponsive legislature.

It is remarkable that our present method of selecting presidential candi­dates was first adopted by initiative In Oregon in 1910. Voters in other states followed Oregon’s lead and used initiative to establish our modern presidential-preference primary system.

Despite the creditable history of ini­tiative, however, myths still surround the process. For instance, Malbin attri­butes the complex California ballot to initiatives, when in reality that state has voted on an average of fewer than two citizen initiatives a year in the last decade. This compares with an average of over 10 measures a year put on the ballot by the legislature itself.

Even when initiatives do reach the ballot, the public votes with restraint by passing only about one in three proposed laws. Because initiatives are so widely debated and subjected to far greater public scrutiny than laws considered in the legislature, the people are “tricked” by special in­terests probably much less often than politicians. Miller summed this up by stating:

“There is no reason to believe that the quality of legislation [produced by initiative] would be inferior to that produced by Congress. As everyone knows, or should know, congressional statutes are often hammered out on the anvil of compromise, and thus tend to reach a low common denominator. On the other hand, it seems plausible that ini­tiatives could be drafted in ways that would eliminate many of the lacunae now lurking in federal statutes [be­cause of those compromises]. The expe­rience in those states that now have ini­tiative procedures would tend to sup­port that position.”

As a means for more precise commu­nication between the people and the in­stitutions of government, voter initia­tive will inject our federal system with greater accountability and citizen par­ticipation. With the further check and balance of the public’s proposing~ and enacting its own laws, our elected officials will begin to represent the peoples more accurately and responsively, thus strengthening our representative system as a whole.

The writer is a national director of Initiative America.

(Added as explanation by People’s Lobby:  In the mid-70’s People’s Lobby obtained an old yellow school bus and set Roger Telschow and John Forster, who were later joined by David Schmidt, chugging across country to educate people on the need for Initiative America.  Their work resulted in 1977 Senate Judiciary Hearings on the proposed Voter Initiative Constitutional Amendment.)