TVB's response to "Comments on <<我們有權選總統>>"

Dear Mr. Woo,

Thank you for your comments as well as those you sent earlier regarding previous episodes of the "We have the right to vote" program. Let me respond to your comments as the producer of the program. We are gratified that our program has such well-informed viewers like you to offer useful feedback. Your email also validates our editorial intent to generate more interest in the U.S. political system in general and the presidential election in particular.

We have reviewed the tape of the program and have consulted with Prof. Tong on your comments. If we are not mistaken, all the three comments pertain to the section on the role of "Referendums" in the U.S. In that episode, we aim to explain the purpose of voting, both to elect government officials and to vote on specific issues, on both the federal and local levels. In that segment, we ask Prof. Tong to explain the purpose for Referendums, given the fact that legislators make laws, and the citizens' views are already expressed by legislators who represent their positions. The obvious question is why with laws made by elected legislators, we would still need Referendum. He is trying to explain the conditions under which the legislative votes are not the sole determinants of some issues. He is using the Constitutional Amendment and President Impeachment as examples, among others.

You are of course correct in stating that there are no nation-wide referendum on either the Constitutional Amendment or the Presidential Impeachment processes. Indeed, there are no national electorates in the U.S. Unlike in many nations, referendums in the U.S. are voted on only in the local elections. On Constitutional Amendments, both federal and state legislations do provide for citizen input as a check against an unresponsive legislature. On the federal level, Art. 5 of the US Constitution provides for a special convention to ratify a U.S. Constitutional Amendment as an alternative for Congressional approval. On the state level, some states (e.g. Massachusetts) provide for a state-wide vote to approve U.S. Constitutional Amendments.

On Presidential Impeachment, you are also correct in pointing out that it is the U.S. House and Senate that vote on impeachment. But some state legislations also stipulate the rights of citizens to introduce initiatives in ballots calling for the impeachment of the U.S. President and Vice Presidents, as many local electorates have done in recent years.

Your point that many propositions do not deal with conflict of interest issues is well taken. Prof. Tong is trying to explain the legislative intent to have an alternative to legislators making laws. He agrees with you that few of the propositions involve conflict of interest, and believes that it has been used by special interests to end-run the legislative process.

As the last point illustrates, Prof. Tong was prepared to speak on much greater detail in the program. He wanted to differentiate various types of propositions, referendums and initiatives; trace the historical evolution of these institutions; use U.S. Supreme Court cases to illustrate the nuances; compare the Californian experiences with those of other states. Given the time limitations of our program and the demographics of our viewers, we have suggested that he should keep it simple, since most of our viewers are not as sophisticated as you are. In trying to keep it simple for our general viewers, it might have appeared to be simplistic for you. We regret if that is the case.

I hope I have clarified some issues raised in your comments. Let me thank you again for drawing them to our attention. We share your interest to bring quality public service programs to our viewers.

-[TVB-USA producer]

Link:
Comments on <<我們有權選總統>> (TVB USA) - 2008/10/12
My response to TVB's response