My TV Commentary on Constitutional Revisions & the National Referendum Law I talked about the strong sense of crisis that looms as PM Abe recklessly steers us toward constitutional revisions that are anti- democratic and pro-state power. The importance of the 7/22 upper house vote cannot be underestimated.

"Even the wise become the unwise in enchanted chambers of Power, whose lamps show every face of the same colour." ? Walter Savage Landor, Imaginary Conversations, Demosthenes and Eubulides

It's been a long time since I've done a TV commentary.
　　　　On Monday, May 14, I was asked to make a live appearance at a TV studio to talk about the National Referendum Law. The network making the request was Nikkei CNBC. It had been about two years since I appeared on this network.
　　　　Lately, I have heard from people at TV networks, large newspapers and wire services that political sources have been interfering with the news more frequently and in more detail than before. As I approached the studio inside the Nihon Keizai Shimbunsha headquarters, I imagined that Nikkei CNBC's decision to invite me on the air will result in bullying by political sources later.
　　　　It had been one year and nine months since my last TV appearance ? dating back to then Prime Minister Koizumi's attempts to privatize the postal services in August 2005. Since then, I had had no connections to the TV world.
　　　　The truth is that I had been blackballed from that TV world by the government, the ruling coalition politicians and the advertising giant Dentsu ? this is what friends and acquaintances in the TV networks told me. I've also experienced for years and years the way TV networks are under the thumb of those holding political power. So I figured that my work with large TV networks and newspaper publishers was finished, and I decided to concentrate on writing books and magazine articles. I also built up my own website and spent more time lecturing. Asking TV networks to be neutral is like asking the sun to rise in the west.
　　　　It's hard for me to talk about myself, but I'm not the type to quibble over the past. I do what comes naturally, and that's the motto I live by. And that's the way I approached this request to appear on Nikkei CNBC.
　　　　While answering the questions of the network and the newscaster on the National Referendum Law, I brought up three points.
　　　　First, I talked about the legal process that restricts any move to revise the Constitution. Normally, this sort of activity should have occurred just after the Constitution was enacted in 1947. Political negligence is to blame for having these referendum regulations decided 60 years after the fact. The General Headquarters, or GHQ as the headquarters of the Occupation was known, exerted strong influence at the time.
　　　　There are certainly problems with the enactment of referendum legislation under Prime Minister Abe, who is trying to make constitutional revision a politically strategic point in the July 22 House of Councillors election. But it is also necessary to ask about the 60 years of inaction on the part of Japan's politicians.
Constitutional revisions are regulated by Article 96, which requires a national referendum. The regulations for a national referendum should have been figured out soon after the Constitution was enacted. 　　　　The second point I made had to do with the process. It is not right for this revision to be pressed by the Liberal Democratic Party and the New Komeito Party only, to the exclusion of the opposition parties. While it's true that the two ruling parties hold two-thirds of the seats in the lower house and a majority in the upper house, it is also true that the "sweeping" victory of the ruling party in the Sept. 11, 2005, general election resulted in the LDP and Komeito garnering 49% of the electoral district votes (less than a majority) and 51% of the proportional representation votes. The two parties are disregarding the opinions of about half the population as they decide the process for constitutional revision. The main reason that there's no agreement between the ruling and opposition parties is Prime Minister Abe. The premier has made constitutional revision a politically strategic point right before the upper house elections. A subject as sensitive as this should be decided in an atmosphere void of political strife.
　　　　My third point was that this politicization of the decision will come back to haunt us. The proposed constitutional amendment needs two-thirds agreement in both the lower and upper houses, and the LDP and Komeito can't achieve this alone. The two parties have more than the required two-thirds in the lower house, but it is highly unlikely that they will maintain that lead three years from now. There will definitely be a general election during this span, and the ruling coalition is bound to lose some seats. The chance that the LDP and Komeito can take two-thirds of the upper house seats is less than slim ? it's practically impossible. This means that the ruling coalition can't go ahead with its proposed amendment of the Constitution. If they can't advance their proposal, then there will be no referendum, no matter if they have passed the National Referendum Law.
　　　　The LDP can't revise the Constitution alone. It can't even do it with New Komeito's help. I am against constitutional revisions, but the LDP and Komeito have created problems even for the revisionists by leaving behind everyone on this issue.
　　　　If the LDP suffers a big loss in the July 22, 2007, upper house vote, a mass resignation of the Abe Cabinet would become very likely. 　　　　There are advantages and disadvantages for the Abe Cabinet in advancing the National Referendum Law, but looking at the issue comprehensively, it seems the advantages might slightly outweigh the negatives. Of course, this is not definite; the situation is fluid.
　　　　The important thing is for the Japanese citizenry to become interested in politics and discuss on a national level the proper path for Japan and its Constitution. The problems surrounding the Constitution deserve a national dialogue whether or not the LDP and Komeito are aiming for constitutional revisions. The time has come for a large-scale national debate on this issue.

(Below are additional comments unrelated to my TV appearance.)
　　　　My political commentary on Nikkei CNBC, which aired on the night of May 14, is summed up above. It seems to me that Abe's politics have turned in an extremely dangerous direction recently. It's not just that he lacks composure; he also has put aside morality and common sense as he reveals his true ambitions of consolidating state power.
It's no exaggeration to say he is reckless. If we do not hand the ruling coalition a defeat in the July 22 upper house election and we do not knock the Abe administration off its pedestal, I fear for Japan's future. At the same time, I wonder how the rest of Japan views the enigma that is New Komeito. While it mouths dissatisfaction, it marches step for step with Prime Minister Abe, supporting him all the way. While it comes up with meaningless phrases like "strengthening the Constitution," Komeito rushes toward constitutional revisions with the LDP, beguiling the Japanese with its two-faced approach.