A people-powered legislative experiment

The questions

1. Can randomly selected groups of citizens identify useful, practical legislative proposals?
2. Does requiring a single, focused agenda item improve proposal quality?
3. Does multi-stage review improve quality and constitutional compatibility?
4. Do randomized groups produce constructive outcomes, or inconsistency, bias, or manipulation?
5. Which issues do citizens most want addressed?

Terms

Frame

A proposed bill or act: one agenda item, 500 characters or fewer.

Framer

A signed-in participant who submits a Frame.

Reframer

A participant randomly selected to review and vote on a Frame at one stage.

Stage

One review-and-vote round. A Frame must pass each stage to advance.

In Circulation

Frames currently moving through the stages.

Fully Framed

The status awarded to a Frame that passes every stage.

Archive

The historical record of Frames and their outcomes, subject to the retention policy.

The rules that protect the process

• Only the Reframers selected for a stage can vote at that stage. Viewing a Frame never grants voting rights.
• Each Reframer casts at most one Yes or No vote per stage. Votes can't be changed once cast.
• Anyone selected for one stage of a Frame is never selected again for that Frame.
• Missing votes are not counted as No. Each stage requires a minimum number of votes (a quorum) before its result counts.
• The rules in force when a Frame is submitted govern it through every stage. Rule changes apply only to new Frames. Every version is published.
• Framers are anonymous to the public and to Reframers. Individual votes are never published.
• Selection, votes, and every stage outcome are recorded in a tamper-evident audit log, so each result can be traced to the votes and rules that produced it.

What Reframers are asked to consider

1. Constitutional compatibility

   Does it appear consistent with the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights?

2. Single agenda item

   Does it address one clear issue?

3. Clarity

   Is it understandable without substantial interpretation?

4. Public benefit

   Could it reasonably improve society, governance, or democracy?

5. Practicality

   Is the policy direction coherent enough to merit further consideration?

A majority vote here is not a legal determination of constitutionality. Constitutional interpretation is complex, and this experiment is not a substitute for legislative counsel or judicial review.

To brush up, try the Question of the Day or practice questions on how the government is built, the rights the Constitution protects, and how its principles apply to a proposal. They're a learning aid: a right answer isn't a legal qualification, and your results are never shown publicly or used in selection.

What is kept, and what is deleted

Every Frame's outcome is part of the experiment's permanent record: its reference, category, dates, the rules it followed, every stage's totals and result, and its history. That record is never deleted.

A Frame's text may be deleted after it finishes, depending on how far it got. Under the current rules:

Failed at Stage 1, withdrawn, or cancelled before passing a stage

text deleted 7 days after the Frame finishes

Failed or cancelled after passing a stage

text kept permanently

Fully Framed

text kept permanently

Removed by moderation

text deleted 30 days after the Frame finishes

Each Frame follows the retention rules in force when it was submitted. Deleted text is not kept in backups longer than the backup retention period, is never in our emails, and is never in the audit log. Pages for Frames whose text was deleted say so.

Who can take part

• 18+Adults only
• USUnited States residents
• @A verified email address

Participants must be 18 or older, live in the United States, and verify an email address. Accounts join the Reframer selection pool after 7 days, and you must have used the site within the last 30 days to stay in it. You can pause selection at any time.