Total Posts:33|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Ideas for a Better Democracy

FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 9:01:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Regardless of your feelings towards democracy, we are going to be stuck with it for the indefinite future and most likely even be seeing more of it across the world, as trends throughout history show. So my question is how you would choose to reform it.

Now here's my own opinion on the matter. Here are 12 things I would like to see changed about democracy in America:

1. The formation of a 3rd of house of congress called the House of Minority. Any candidate from a congressional election, whether for the senate or house of representatives, who comes in 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th, will become a member of this new house. They have the ability to propose bills to the other houses by majority vote and may actually bypass them if they reach a majority of 3/4, going straight to the president's desk. Bills from the other two houses do not need to be passed by this one but it can make it's own bill to repeal a different one that they passed. This is the most unlikely of my proposals.

2. The ability of average citizens, via direct vote, to change the vote of their representative on a bill if a quota of signatures is reached on a petition. Switzerland already has this.

3. Strict limits on political campaign expenditure.

4. Shorter terms and term limits.

5. Individuals elected by each and ever city with the duty of listening to average citizens and voicing their grievances to local, state and federal governments. All levels of government that they report to have time set aside that they must take to listen to this individual. Grievances are made public.

6. Dropping the voting age to 16.

7. Abolishing the electoral collage.

8. Repealing the Patriot Act and improving freedom of speech.

9. Requiring all citizens of voting age to register to vote.

10. Guaranteeing felons the right to vote.

11. Amendment requiring the separation of church and state.

12. Political debate being made a class in public school.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 9:17:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 9:01:10 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Regardless of your feelings towards democracy, we are going to be stuck with it for the indefinite future and most likely even be seeing more of it across the world, as trends throughout history show. So my question is how you would choose to reform it.

Now here's my own opinion on the matter. Here are 12 things I would like to see changed about democracy in America:

1. The formation of a 3rd of house of congress called the House of Minority. Any candidate from a congressional election, whether for the senate or house of representatives, who comes in 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th, will become a member of this new house. They have the ability to propose bills to the other houses by majority vote and may actually bypass them if they reach a majority of 3/4, going straight to the president's desk. Bills from the other two houses do not need to be passed by this one but it can make it's own bill to repeal a different one that they passed. This is the most unlikely of my proposals.

I disagree. Presidential candidates do not deserve that power just because they ran for president and got votes. A house like that I don't see sas very necessary, but should it be implemented, it certainly should not be headed by failed presidential candidates.

2. The ability of average citizens, via direct vote, to change the vote of their representative on a bill if a quota of signatures is reached on a petition. Switzerland already has this.

Similar to a referendum, which already exists.

3. Strict limits on political campaign expenditure.

No. They should have the freedom to send as they wish.

4. Shorter terms and term limits.

Why? They seem short enough. When a person heads an office, the idea is that they're helping to direct the nation or their region. You must allow them enough time for their direction to take effect. Shorter term limits again seem unnecessary.

5. Individuals elected by each and ever city with the duty of listening to average citizens and voicing their grievances to local, state and federal governments. All levels of government that they report to have time set aside that they must take to listen to this individual. Grievances are made public.

6. Dropping the voting age to 16.

No way in hell. The average 16 year old is highly politically uninformed. They tend to either follow exactly the same positions as their parents, or they follow exactly the same position as the majority, not really thinking independently. They're also not interested in politics. These are generalizations, yes, but I'm 99% sure they're true, I mean come on.

7. Abolishing the electoral collage.

No. Better to have the majority of every state happy with the president than just the majority of the country alone. Electoral college lessens the amount of unhappy states.

8. Repealing the Patriot Act and improving freedom of speech.

Agreed,...except I'm a little nervous about the last part. Some of you guys distort freedom of speech to an extreme extent that its ridiculous.

9. Requiring all citizens of voting age to register to vote.

Why do you think this is okay? We should be working on removing the requirement of signing up for military service once a guy turns 18, this is a step backwards.

10. Guaranteeing felons the right to vote.

Agreed.

11. Amendment requiring the separation of church and state.

Agreed.

12. Political debate being made a class in public school.

No. It is not a basic necessity and it is not right to make that a requirement. Making political debate a class is like making chess a national class. They both help intellectually, but it wouldn't be fair or sensible to implement.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 9:36:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 9:17:11 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/10/2011 9:01:10 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Regardless of your feelings towards democracy, we are going to be stuck with it for the indefinite future and most likely even be seeing more of it across the world, as trends throughout history show. So my question is how you would choose to reform it.

Now here's my own opinion on the matter. Here are 12 things I would like to see changed about democracy in America:

1. The formation of a 3rd of house of congress called the House of Minority. Any candidate from a congressional election, whether for the senate or house of representatives, who comes in 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th, will become a member of this new house. They have the ability to propose bills to the other houses by majority vote and may actually bypass them if they reach a majority of 3/4, going straight to the president's desk. Bills from the other two houses do not need to be passed by this one but it can make it's own bill to repeal a different one that they passed. This is the most unlikely of my proposals.

I disagree. Presidential candidates do not deserve that power just because they ran for president and got votes. A house like that I don't see sas very necessary, but should it be implemented, it certainly should not be headed by failed presidential candidates.

I said congressional candidates, not presidential candidates.

3. Strict limits on political campaign expenditure.

No. They should have the freedom to send as they wish.

So it's ok that the wealthier a candidate is the more likely they are to win an election? It's ok that some candidates will get much more attention than others just because of how much they spend on it?

4. Shorter terms and term limits.

Why? They seem short enough. When a person heads an office, the idea is that they're helping to direct the nation or their region. You must allow them enough time for their direction to take effect. Shorter term limits again seem unnecessary.

That's a good point.

6. Dropping the voting age to 16.

No way in hell. The average 16 year old is highly politically uninformed. They tend to either follow exactly the same positions as their parents, or they follow exactly the same position as the majority, not really thinking independently. They're also not interested in politics. These are generalizations, yes, but I'm 99% sure they're true, I mean come on.

No way in hell. The average 18 through anything year old is highly politically uninformed. They tend to either follow exactly the same positions as their parents, or they follow exactly the same position as the majority, not really thinking independently. They're also not interested in politics. These are generalizations, yes, but I'm 99% sure they're true, I mean come on.

If someone isn't politically interesting, they won't vote. It's not up to the government to decide who is politically literate or not. It's my opinion that conservatives are politically illiterate but I don't think they should be denied the right to vote based on that.


7. Abolishing the electoral collage.

No. Better to have the majority of every state happy with the president than just the majority of the country alone. Electoral college lessens the amount of unhappy states.

Uh...why?

9. Requiring all citizens of voting age to register to vote.

Why do you think this is okay? We should be working on removing the requirement of signing up for military service once a guy turns 18, this is a step backwards.

Because only about 60% of people are currently registered to vote. And many of those people don't bother to vote. With elections being decided by a fraction of the voters who are a fraction of those registered who are a fraction of everyone, elections end up being decided by a very small minority of people. The voters who voted for Obama in the last presidential election were around 14% of the population.

12. Political debate being made a class in public school.

No. It is not a basic necessity and it is not right to make that a requirement. Making political debate a class is like making chess a national class. They both help intellectually, but it wouldn't be fair or sensible to implement.

Do you have a better alternative to educating people about politics in a non-biased way?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
kohai
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 9:46:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Agree with most points. How about a DIRECT democracy?
1) Whatever has contradictory attributes does not exist.
2) The Biblical God has contradictory attributes.
3) Therefore, the Biblical God does not exist
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 9:49:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
1. Congressional candidates, okay, maybe, but I still don't see the necessity or who it really helps.

3. I guess that makes sense. I admittedly don't know enough about that, I'd have to look into it further

6. "If someone isn't politically interesting, they won't vote. It's not up to the government to decide who is politically literate or not. It's my opinion that conservatives are politically illiterate but I don't think they should be denied the right to vote based on that."

You do realize that the government is still deciding who is politically literate by your plan, just that they made a new decision....18 is a reasonable age because they are factually more mature than the 16 year old.

7. The electoral college gives more voice to individual regions, that's why.

9. You can't force people to do what they don't feel like doing. If people make the conscious choice not to vote, then that's their decision. Why should the government force them? I feel like you're going against your own beliefs here.

10. People must choose to educate themselves about politics, and the bare basics of politics are already covered in history class.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
randolph7
Posts: 307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 10:09:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
How about different forms of voting? If we use a system other than first past the post then minority candidates will stand a better chance of getting elected. We desperately need something other than the red and blue dichotomy of recent US governments.
"ahh but i have indeed found the burdon of truth the, muffs have found it. oh mothy dear dear mothy"
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 10:26:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
This is like asking ideas for better communism. It's not that it needs improvement, its that it doesn't work. We need a monarchy.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 10:28:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 10:26:51 PM, darkkermit wrote:
This is like asking ideas for better communism. It's not that it needs improvement, its that it doesn't work. We need a monarchy.

is this a joke, satire that has gone way over my head, or do you honestly believe that nonsense?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
gerrandesquire
Posts: 1,258
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 10:30:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 10:26:51 PM, darkkermit wrote:
This is like asking ideas for better communism. It's not that it needs improvement, its that it doesn't work. We need a monarchy.

Regardless of your feelings towards democracy, we are going to be stuck with it for the indefinite future and most likely even be seeing more of it across the world, as trends throughout history show. So my question is how you would choose to reform it.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 10:36:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Proportional Representation is a better way to implement your first idea. Rather than separating minority and majority, they are represented in proportion to their constituencies in Congress united.

One way to implement this is the Party List.
http://en.wikipedia.org...
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 10:37:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 9:01:10 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Regardless of your feelings towards democracy, we are going to be stuck with it for the indefinite future and most likely even be seeing more of it across the world, as trends throughout history show.

Correct. A democracy will not vote itself out of power.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 10:51:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 10:48:50 PM, Mirza wrote:
Limiting what should be voted on. What we have today is extremist democracy. Unacceptable.

*shaking my head* *sigh*
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 11:04:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 10:51:55 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/10/2011 10:48:50 PM, Mirza wrote:
Limiting what should be voted on. What we have today is extremist democracy. Unacceptable.

*shaking my head* *sigh*
We shouldn't be able to put the right to religious freedom into voting. We shouldn't be able to put the right to be the master over your own body into voting. That's extremist democracy (and don't mention the Constitution, the reason it's there is partially because it gives core rights that prevent extremist democracy from taking power).
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 11:07:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
3) Why limits on campaign expenditure. Gathering funds through donations is an important skill for a politician to have, and the more they can get, the more advantage they should have in the election.

9) Why should all citizens be required to vote? They know that if they don't vote, their candidate won't win. That should be motivation enough.

10) Agreed. Felons should be able to vote if they want.

11) Separation of church and state - isn't it already done? What country are you talking about? Last I heard, the US was secular.

12) Public speaking, debate and communication should be made a class in public schools. I feel "political debate" is too specific for people who may not be interested. I wouldn't mind "politics" being made a class though.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 11:08:36 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
If people are politically apathetic, forcing them to vote isn't going to help anything.

As it stands, a single vote does virtually nothing right now, so it would be in one's self-interest not to vote. However, if many people apply this logic, many people will stop voting, making each vote more important, and giving people incentive to vote again. Therefore, the people who vote are the ones who have the most vested interest in seeing their candidate win.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 11:09:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 11:04:03 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 9/10/2011 10:51:55 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/10/2011 10:48:50 PM, Mirza wrote:
Limiting what should be voted on. What we have today is extremist democracy. Unacceptable.

*shaking my head* *sigh*
We shouldn't be able to put the right to religious freedom into voting. We shouldn't be able to put the right to be the master over your own body into voting. That's extremist democracy (and don't mention the Constitution, the reason it's there is partially because it gives core rights that prevent extremist democracy from taking power).

Your ideology suggests a permanent set of beliefs that shouldn't be discussed... That is utter nonsense. What prevents a stupid idea from falling into that immortal status? EVERYTHING must ALWAYS be open for discussion, the beauty of democracy is that the majority will always be happy, and freedom makes people happy. Hence the majority will always be free.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
kohai
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 11:12:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 11:04:03 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 9/10/2011 10:51:55 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/10/2011 10:48:50 PM, Mirza wrote:
Limiting what should be voted on. What we have today is extremist democracy. Unacceptable.

*shaking my head* *sigh*
We shouldn't be able to put the right to religious freedom into voting. We shouldn't be able to put the right to be the master over your own body into voting. That's extremist democracy (and don't mention the Constitution, the reason it's there is partially because it gives core rights that prevent extremist democracy from taking power).

While I do support a direct democracy, I have to agree with Mirza. Human rights are never debatable
1) Whatever has contradictory attributes does not exist.
2) The Biblical God has contradictory attributes.
3) Therefore, the Biblical God does not exist
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 11:13:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 11:09:57 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/10/2011 11:04:03 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 9/10/2011 10:51:55 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/10/2011 10:48:50 PM, Mirza wrote:
Limiting what should be voted on. What we have today is extremist democracy. Unacceptable.

*shaking my head* *sigh*
We shouldn't be able to put the right to religious freedom into voting. We shouldn't be able to put the right to be the master over your own body into voting. That's extremist democracy (and don't mention the Constitution, the reason it's there is partially because it gives core rights that prevent extremist democracy from taking power).

Your ideology suggests a permanent set of beliefs that shouldn't be discussed... That is utter nonsense. What prevents a stupid idea from falling into that immortal status?
Reasonable people.

EVERYTHING must ALWAYS be open for discussion, the beauty of democracy is that the majority will always be happy, and freedom makes people happy. Hence the majority will always be free.
So, what prevents a majority from passing on their stupid beliefs for decades, and they vote against freedom of religion? You think the majority will make your discussions have any value?

We have natural rights. The law must be reflected upon them. The reason why you say everything should be open to discussion is because you base your claim upon the fact that we all own our selves, hence we have the right to freely express ourselves however we want to. But, why should that natural right be preferred over the natural right to adhere to whatever belief you want?
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2011 11:15:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 11:13:13 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 9/10/2011 11:09:57 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/10/2011 11:04:03 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 9/10/2011 10:51:55 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/10/2011 10:48:50 PM, Mirza wrote:
Limiting what should be voted on. What we have today is extremist democracy. Unacceptable.

*shaking my head* *sigh*
We shouldn't be able to put the right to religious freedom into voting. We shouldn't be able to put the right to be the master over your own body into voting. That's extremist democracy (and don't mention the Constitution, the reason it's there is partially because it gives core rights that prevent extremist democracy from taking power).

Your ideology suggests a permanent set of beliefs that shouldn't be discussed... That is utter nonsense. What prevents a stupid idea from falling into that immortal status?
Reasonable people.

EVERYTHING must ALWAYS be open for discussion, the beauty of democracy is that the majority will always be happy, and freedom makes people happy. Hence the majority will always be free.
So, what prevents a majority from passing on their stupid beliefs for decades, and they vote against freedom of religion? You think the majority will make your discussions have any value?

REASONABLE PEOPLE ....nuff said.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 12:04:31 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
To all those who mentioned it, I never suggested that people should be required to vote. I don't believe in that. I suggested they should be required to register to vote.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 12:05:25 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'm not seeing many other ideas in this thread. I was just giving my opinion to my own question. My opinion isn't the subject of this thread.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 12:34:21 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 9:01:10 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Regardless of your feelings towards democracy, we are going to be stuck with it for the indefinite future and most likely even be seeing more of it across the world, as trends throughout history show. So my question is how you would choose to reform it.

Now here's my own opinion on the matter. Here are 12 things I would like to see changed about democracy in America:

1. The formation of a 3rd of house of congress called the House of Minority. Any candidate from a congressional election, whether for the senate or house of representatives, who comes in 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th, will become a member of this new house. They have the ability to propose bills to the other houses by majority vote and may actually bypass them if they reach a majority of 3/4, going straight to the president's desk. Bills from the other two houses do not need to be passed by this one but it can make it's own bill to repeal a different one that they passed. This is the most unlikely of my proposals.

Do we really need more hurdles to legislation. This seems pointless...

2. The ability of average citizens, via direct vote, to change the vote of their representative on a bill if a quota of signatures is reached on a petition. Switzerland already has this.

One of the points of American Republicanism is that the Representative owe their own judgement to their people... If people don't like them, they can vote them out...

3. Strict limits on political campaign expenditure.

Why? If people are dumb enough to vote for the candidate with the most commercials, we shouldn't have democracy in the first place...


4. Shorter terms and term limits.

Already have these, every 2 years for Reps and every 6 years for Senators, people can vote them out if they don't like them...

5. Individuals elected by each and ever city with the duty of listening to average citizens and voicing their grievances to local, state and federal governments. All levels of government that they report to have time set aside that they must take to listen to this individual. Grievances are made public.

Even within cities, people disagree... What does this do to help anything...

6. Dropping the voting age to 16.

If anything, this should be raised. Im tired of uninformed kids electing guys like Obama...

7. Abolishing the electoral collage.

Why? Shouldnt small states have power too...

8. Repealing the Patriot Act and improving freedom of speech.

Too vague...

9. Requiring all citizens of voting age to register to vote.

Freedoms?

10. Guaranteeing felons the right to vote.

How would this help anything...

11. Amendment requiring the separation of church and state.

I don't see how Christianity has hurt democracy...

12. Political debate being made a class in public school.

In practice, it will be liberal public school teachers forcing their own views on kids....
President of DDO
iamdrunkritenow
Posts: 25
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 12:37:02 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 9:01:10 PM, FREEDO wrote:
1. The formation of a 3rd of house of congress called the House of Minority. Any candidate from a congressional election, whether for the senate or house of representatives, who comes in 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th, will become a member of this new house. They have the ability to propose bills to the other houses by majority vote and may actually bypass them if they reach a majority of 3/4, going straight to the president's desk. Bills from the other two houses do not need to be passed by this one but it can make it's own bill to repeal a different one that they passed. This is the most unlikely of my proposals.

retarded

2. The ability of average citizens, via direct vote, to change the vote of their representative on a bill if a quota of signatures is reached on a petition. Switzerland already has this.

so basically anyone that works and has a life will not vote while the welfare citizens can vote themselves into prosperity

3. Strict limits on political campaign expenditure.

agree with this on the basis that voters are stupid and chances of education are slim

4. Shorter terms and term limits.

agree as well

5. Individuals elected by each and ever city with the duty of listening to average citizens and voicing their grievances to local, state and federal governments. All levels of government that they report to have time set aside that they must take to listen to this individual. Grievances are made public.

Lol how much time and how will one out of every thousand citizens sharing grievences be heard? Idealistic not realistic.

6. Dropping the voting age to 16.

More uneducated voters that haven't even worked a day on their life sharing an equal vote with someone who has? Get real. If anything it should be that those who work and pay taxes should have a vote. Those who don't get no say.


7. Abolishing the electoral collage.

Does nothing as the electoral college is just a formality.

8. Repealing the Patriot Act and improving freedom of speech.

yes agree completely


9. Requiring all citizens of voting age to register to vote.

what's the purpose if you're not forcing them to vote? Seems like a waste of taxpayer dollars

10. Guaranteeing felons the right to vote.

If you violate someone elses rights you have no rights to decide who runs the country. Sorry lol my vote isn't equivalent to murderers, serial killers and rapists. They have no say.

11. Amendment requiring the separation of church and state.

Isn't that already there?

12. Political debate being made a class in public school.

How about just debate period? There are far more pressing things such as economics, personal financial management that should be mandatory before debate. Especially political debate which will doubtlessly be taught objectively according to the politics of the teacher.
iamdrunkritenow
Posts: 25
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 12:42:05 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
The solution to democracy is statism and localism over federalism. Competition for taxpayers will direct states towards laws, expenditures, and taxation that produce the most utilities for the taxpayers.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 3:26:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Most of them sound good
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2011 4:21:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/10/2011 9:01:10 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Regardless of your feelings towards democracy, we are going to be stuck with it for the indefinite future and most likely even be seeing more of it across the world, as trends throughout history show. So my question is how you would choose to reform it.

Now here's my own opinion on the matter. Here are 12 things I would like to see changed about democracy in America:

1. The formation of a 3rd of house of congress called the House of Minority. Any candidate from a congressional election, whether for the senate or house of representatives, who comes in 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th, will become a member of this new house. They have the ability to propose bills to the other houses by majority vote and may actually bypass them if they reach a majority of 3/4, going straight to the president's desk. Bills from the other two houses do not need to be passed by this one but it can make it's own bill to repeal a different one that they passed. This is the most unlikely of my proposals.

2. The ability of average citizens, via direct vote, to change the vote of their representative on a bill if a quota of signatures is reached on a petition. Switzerland already has this.

3. Strict limits on political campaign expenditure.

Why?

4. Shorter terms and term limits.

Read 000ike's post.

5. Individuals elected by each and ever city with the duty of listening to average citizens and voicing their grievances to local, state and federal governments. All levels of government that they report to have time set aside that they must take to listen to this individual. Grievances are made public.

6. Dropping the voting age to 16.

The older you are, the more likely you are to vote rationally. I might even want to raise it, as the more that can be done to curb irrational voting the better.

7. Abolishing the electoral collage.

8. Repealing the Patriot Act and improving freedom of speech.

Yay!

9. Requiring all citizens of voting age to register to vote.

No. Have you read the Myth of the Rational Voter? Basically, voters have tendencies to vote irrationally the less they are educated. However, the more you are educated the more likely you are to vote. Low voting is one of the things that helps to mitigate one of the failings of democracy-irrational voters.

10. Guaranteeing felons the right to vote.

Aye.

11. Amendment requiring the separation of church and state.

Separation of church and state as in no mention of religion allowed in state or no enforcing religion?

12. Political debate being made a class in public school.

If the free market decides.