81–90 of 97 posts
I would much rather see all bills and amendments put under a public version control where everyone could see who is adding what in real-time. This transparency would really help out democracy in my opinion.
Sadly, implementing it (as technologically easy as that is) wouldn't happen.
It's an interesting idea but has the same flaw as term limits: the power would shift from the Congressperson to the staffers who are unknown, unaccountable, and sometimes even worse people. When I worked for various agencies in DC, one of the first things I learned was who the power players and key people were in each of our Senators' & Congresspersons' offices. It is quite often not the Senator but the scheduler. Ye…
But if every 2-4 years the ENTIRE system is flipped like a compost heap, you would have a completely different staff, and a different NON-career politician who doesn't need your support for the next run for office. No amount of money will select me next turn-over (assuming it is a truly random selection).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bias towards those whose profession benefits from a growing abundance of laws? Sounds like a recipe for disaster.
If you are going to build a bridge are you going to hire an engineer or a cook? Now if you're going to create laws would you hire someone who has studied roman, germanic, sharia law since the times of Hammurabi, philosophy, sociology, politics and everything necessary to understand human interaction and association, or a bus driver? We get the government we deserve, proportional to our level of ignorance. There is a…
It doesn't take an Engineer to recognize that a bridge needs to be constructed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's dumb about it? It's called greasing the wheel. You want to get the meeting over every other asshole who wants a meeting. Who gets the meeting, gets the laws.
The girl is dumb for playing loose with American legislation for fucking chocolates.
But at least every single one of them would recognize that this short term is the most important of their lives and would not want to do things to piss off their friends & families when they return to their lives.
Better than some spoiled ivy league brat who sees congress as a stepping stone to make more money.
The jury system is an entirely different problem space. There the decision is made based on a relatively narrow pool of information, and is in fact constrained to that pool of information and the personal experience of the individual jurors.
Congress is a whole other matter. There decisions must be informed based upon a vastly greater background of knowledge and, dare I say, wisdom. International affairs and history, broad understanding of current events, economics, knowledge of our system of law and jurisprudence. Do the individuals in congress all meet this standard? No. But the process of putting oneself and one's knowledge and experience forward to the voting public does act as a sort of filter to weed out people who have no understanding or ability to govern.
Get some information on the internal democracy of the Bahai faith. They have candidateless elections - essentially you vote for any member of the faith you personally think is very capable and the ones who have the most votes is elected. And to avoid any cult of person, you elect councils of 9 people that have to decide with absolute majority about their topics. This Bahai system is almost impossible to game - in cas…
You have a clear definition for "bad people" as part of your religion. Whether or not that process works, adding a rigid morality does not improve simple plurality voting for most populations.
Thinks like approval or rank voting, for example.
I don't understand why these minor changes don't get implemented.
It's an interesting idea but has the same flaw as term limits: the power would shift from the Congressperson to the staffers who are unknown, unaccountable, and sometimes even worse people. When I worked for various agencies in DC, one of the first things I learned was who the power players and key people were in each of our Senators' & Congresspersons' offices. It is quite often not the Senator but the scheduler. Ye…
Why would a representative leave so much influence in the hands of a girl in her middle twenties who's dumb enough to doll out influence to bringers of chocolate?