+- Madison Motorsports (https://forum.mmsports.org)
+-- Forum: Madison Motorsports (https://forum.mmsports.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Lounge (https://forum.mmsports.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: How to change the electoral process? (/showthread.php?tid=7368)
How to change the electoral process? - Ole - 06-07-2008
Since many of have voiced your opinions on our electoral process as being seriously flawed. What would you do to change it?
- Ginger - 06-07-2008
:golfclap:
I'll post later in the day when I'm not wasting away the sunlight!
- Ole - 06-07-2008
Yeah, I have a plumber here or else I would be at Lake Anna boarding and skiing........I wish I knew how to fix a darn faucet.
- Feersty - 06-07-2008
:? I am not going outside because it is too hot.
- CaptainHenreh - 06-07-2008
Feersty Wrote::? I am not going outside because it is too hot.
Thanks for sharing, feersty!
Now, I personally think that it's not so much the electoral process that's broken, it's everything before and after.
How would I change it?
#1: Limit the amount of money spent by candidates for any office, and limit the way they can spend that money. The money should be paid from a central federal fund and should have an inflation-adjusted cap. That money may NOT be spent on any manner of media advertisement. No commercials, no newspaper ads, no buses, no bumper stickers, no 'This ad paid for by concerned paperhangers for Candidate X.'
#2: The primary way people should find information about candidates is through national, televised debates, where each candidate is asked a series of the same general policy and knowledge questions.
#3: At every voting time, each registered voter will be mailed a booklet with the name and a brief bio/spec sheet of each candidate on it, at least one week prior to voting. The information on these sheets will be based on the questions and answers from the aformentioned debates.
#4: Election results shall be sealed until after all votes have been cast. No exit polls, none of that horseshit. When all the votes are in, then and ONLY then shall the tallies be released to the public and the winner announced.
These four rules or slight variations thereof shall be applied for ever candidate for any government position. Period. President, senator, whatever.
Finally, one more change I would make in our government is to prevent "riders" to bills. Each and every bill before the house or senate shall deal with exactly one subject, and any content not directly related to the bill shall cause the bill to be returned to the originator of the bill. "Riders" are the most horrible abuse of democracy that exists today. They are subversive and damaging, and they should be eliminated. (The freakin' president could eliminate riders altogether, but no president has the balls to veto the "Protect Kittens and Puppies Act".)
- Goodspeed - 06-07-2008
We need more than two parties with a strong chance of winning every sort of election.
Without espousing Great Britain (which really isn't much better than we are politically in many ways) we need a European-style two and a half party system.
Where as the Brits have the Labour, Conservative, and Liberal Democrats we would have the Democrats, Republicans, and Libertarians (for example). I see it as a sort of "checks and balances" system...whereas two parties will naturally become polar opposites, we need a strong and viable 3rd to provide at least some middle ground on at least some issues.
Today we have a plurality/first past the post system of single member districts exactly like GB, Canada and France to name a few. However, in countries like France, they have a two-ballot system to encourage further competition and selection among a wider array of candidates. This sort of thing might help in our country, where we focus on one candidate from the get-go and seemingly interesting candidates (Ron Paul, Bob Barr) fall by the wayside as they receive little to no media attention.
Pundits must die.
We are facing an interesting predicament today. The Bush administration served to discredit many of today's politicians who voted for a widely and publicly supported Patriot Act that has now turned out to be more criminal than good in nature, not to mention voting for the Iraq war. The real problem in all this is that truth is no longer important to these people or anyone else, its simply overlooked as lies and deceit become commonplace. I'd love to see the British parliament's "Question Time" enacted in our Congress, whereby the PM has to answer to any and all questions, Bush or Obama or McCain would personally have to testify to their actions. Executive privilege must be done away with, as should much of the government as well. People have been so screwed and disillusioned by the past 8 years that I fear faith and truth no longer have a place in politics, and the worst fear of all is that people might be ok with that.
- .RJ - 06-07-2008
Goodspeed Wrote:People have been so screwed and disillusioned by the past 8 years that I fear faith and truth no longer have a place in politics, and the worst fear of all is that people might be ok with that.
8 years?
- Goodspeed - 06-07-2008
.RJ Wrote:8 years?
Yes, longer I know, I just used the last 8 of our current administration as it is the most recent and relevant to current voters.
- .RJ - 06-07-2008
Yep, along with everyone else that points to dubya as the reason for everything that has "failed" in our political system, economy, and country like its a big conspiracy of the man keepin' us down while the oil companies get rich. This shit has been going on for a very long time.
- Steve85 - 06-07-2008
CaptainHenreh Wrote:Feersty Wrote::? I am not going outside because it is too hot.
Thanks for sharing, feersty!
Now, I personally think that it's not so much the electoral process that's broken, it's everything before and after.
How would I change it?
#1:
#2:
#3:
#4:
These four rules or slight variations thereof shall be applied for ever candidate for any government position. Period. President, senator, whatever.
Finally, one more change I would make in our government is to prevent "riders" to bills. ...
I agree.
The line item veto would be good way to discourage these riders but as we know it would result in partisan selection of items to be vetoed.
I would add congressional term limits. Career politicians do not make hard choices. Some of it is our fault, we want them to cut waste, just not the waste that supports our local economy.
- NTIman - 06-09-2008
Rex, I think all of those are very good points.
Your plan for the pamphlet based on the debates is great, that way everyone can see just how much these idiots change their minds 4 or 5 times during the election process in hopes of getting more voters and hoping that most people don't notice that their policy changes from debate to debate. (and yes, every campaign does it)
- CaptainHenreh - 06-10-2008
Steve85 Wrote:The line item veto would be good way to discourage these riders but as we know it would result in partisan selection of items to be vetoed.
I see what you're saying, but a Line-item veto would be too much power, at least at first. What needs to happen is we need a president with sack and principles who will just give that shit back if it has unrelated stuff in it. If this is the "Protect Puppies and Kittens Act" and there's stuff in there about otters, send it back. They'll get the hint eventually.
Goodspeed Wrote:I'd love to see the British parliament's "Question Time" enacted in our Congress, whereby the PM has to answer to any and all questions, Bush or Obama or McCain would personally have to testify to their actions.
You know, McCain suggested that very thing.
Steve-o is also right about term limits, but I'm not ready to demand it.
- Andy - 06-10-2008
It's funny that a bunch of self proclaimed libertarians are arguing for more rules and regulations. Why not push for greater voter knowledge? That's the whole point of democracy. The people are the checks and balances.
For example, how many of you guys know that today is the Dem/Rep congressional primary? You don't have to vote but I doubt many of you even knew it.
- Ole - 06-10-2008
I knew and have already voted.
- CaptainHenreh - 06-10-2008
Andy Wrote:It's funny that a bunch of self proclaimed libertarians are arguing for more rules and regulations. Why not push for greater voter knowledge? That's the whole point of democracy. The people are the checks and balances.
Don't be obtuse. That's exactly what's being pushed for. Not rules for rules' sake, but trying to insure that knowledge and judgement of the voters, NOT MONEY decide elections. Increased transparency will result in greater and less biased voter knowledge, giving power back to the people...surely that's something you can get behind Andy.
- Ole - 06-10-2008
How about an IQ test to allow one to vote?
Even better: an IQ test prior to allowing procreation?
(all said as a joke, for those that may take offense or take these comments seriously)
- mrbaggio - 06-10-2008
Ole Wrote:How about an IQ test to allow one to vote?
Even better: an IQ test prior to allowing procreation?
(all said as a joke for those that may take offense or take these comments seriously)
If anyone takes offense they are the ones that would likely be prohibited from both acts.
- CaptainHenreh - 06-10-2008
Ole Wrote:How about an IQ test to allow one to vote?
Nah, voting is a right of the citizen.
Now, you want to talk about citizenship requirements...