C.3(a). Grounds for Excusal from Civic Duty

Citizens may be excused from Civic Duty only for the following reasons:

1. Severe physical or mental disability that prevents them from serving, as confirmed by their personal doctor and a court-appointed doctor. If the two doctors disagree, the federal judge reviewing the petition decides.

2. Age seventy or older.

3. Legal custody of a child under twelve years old, and serving would leave the child without supervision.

4. High school students currently attending classes.

5. Employees of state or federal legislatures.

6. Primary caretakers of someone who cannot care for themselves, as determined by a federal judge.

7. Cannot understand English well enough to participate.

8. Active duty military service.

Failing to fulfill civic duties can mean the loss of civic powers. For the civic duty system to be fair, there needs to be a clear explanation of excused absences. This list lays out the acceptable excuses for civic duties. These eight excused categories cover those who can’t participate. Participation for some people would create unfair choices, like leaving a young child unattended or risking loss of their civic powers. This clause protects them, too. It isn’t a “anyone can get an excuse for any reason” type of list. It is limited to real, demonstrable need. The most often abused exemption – medical infirmity – requires the personal physician to certify the citizen’s condition, but also a court-appointed physician to concur. This prevents the wealthy or well-connected from doctor-shopping to get excusals that they don’t deserve.

A federal district judge must review all excusal requests. Depending on how complex the request is, that review may be administrative, or it may require a hearing, or both. The judge will decide whether the Citizen meets the requirements. Citizens who are excused for temporary reasons may be called again when their situation changes.

Some excusal requests require legal parsing. Since that’s the case, every excusal request has to be approved or rejected by a federal district judge. This review can be administrative, or it may require a hearing at the judge’s discretion. If I were a district judge, my approach would be to let my Magistrate Judge do an administrative review and give me recommendations. I would only personally handle those cases requiring a hearing. That may not be the only plausible scenario, though.

No other reasons for excusal are allowed. Work obligations, business needs, or personal convenience are not grounds for excusal.

There is always someone who says, “But I have to work,” or “I have a business to run,” or “My niece is graduating from pre-K that day.” Those are all important things in our lives. They really do matter at the individual level. Still, they aren’t good enough reasons to be excused from your civic duties.

To the extent possible, excusal requests should be handled on a broad, categorical basis, rather than for each instance of civic duty. Petitions for excusal must be available for submission online as well as in person. When no reasonable means existed for advance notice of an absence, excusal can be requested after the fact. After the fact, excuses can consider a wider array of mitigating factors to address the unpredictability and inherent chaos of the real world. Still, they must first be truly unforeseeable, and second, truly have limited or impeded the citizen’s ability to participate in their duties.

Federal district courts already handle an enormous burden, and this provision asks them to take on even more. This subparagraph is designed to ease some of that burden for them. It also reduces the burden on citizens who have real grounds to be excused across the board. They don’t have to reapply every time they are selected for service.

It also semi-automates the petition process for those who want that. The online petition relieves the burden from those who can’t make it to the courthouse to file a petition in person (probably the very people who need the excusal in the first place). Still, some citizens distrust digital forms, and the paper petition option is open to them if they want it.

Finally, there is an escape hatch for people who had appendicitis or some other unforeseen calamity on the day of their service. Those people can file for excusal after the fact, but the bar is set at “no reasonable means for advance notice.” That means, “Oh, crap. I forgot,” doesn’t meet the standard for this type of excusal. On the other hand, if your water heater exploded that morning, or you had a car accident on the way to your service, you probably have a reasonable case.

C.3(a₁). Tracking Unexcused Civic Non-Participation. Within three months of ratification of this Charter, Congress must appoint a federal agency to develop an accessible database of Citizens who have unexcused absences from Civic Duties.

In every instance of unexcused absence, the overseeing agency (county elections office for election workers, etc.) must report the absence for entry into the database.

For the earned civic power system to work, there has to be a way to track when people have unexcused absences. The problem is, some civic duties are relevant in one jurisdiction (local jury service, election work) while others are relevant in another (redistricting commissions). How can we ensure a unified system to keep up with all of it? This subparagraph commands Congress to appoint an agency to develop and maintain an “accessible database” for tracking participation. This doesn’t require a wholesale expansion of the federal government, but it does mandate a modest expansion to build and maintain this infrastructure.

The word “accessible” is not a throwaway here. It is in the language for a purpose. Congress decides the exact architecture and interface of the database and the agency it chooses to operate it. That said, the database itself has to be accessible for data entry to all levels of government, and it needs to be searchable for the public at large.

Data entry needs to be open to various government stakeholders. Each overseeing agency has a mandated duty to record unexcused absences. More importantly, citizens must be able to access the database to check the accuracy of their records. Their civic powers are on the line. They need to be able to ensure their records are accurate. If they aren’t, they can see that and ask for corrections.

C.3(a₂). Enforcement of Civic Duty. At any time that a Person has at least two unexcused absences from Civic Duty, they may be charged with Failure to Fulfill a Civic Duty. If they reach four such absences, they must be so charged

This subparagraph is straightforward. It makes it clear when a citizen can be charged with Failure to Fulfill a Civic Duty. More importantly, it also affirmatively states when that is no longer a matter of discretion. Once a citizen has four unexcused absences, charging isn’t optional. At that point, the government is obliged to act.