Electioneering

[Statistikhengst]

Fair and simple, baby!

That's what she always said to me. I never believe it.

Oh, sorry. You are talking about elections. I was thinking of my girlfriends and their shopping jaunts.

 

[Tresha91203]

I had the same thought about the Senators. I am still chewing on this and afraid it may be over my head but did not feel the Senators were really addressed. The idea is each state get an equal number despite their population. The Founders viewed the States themselves as important. They wanted Louisiana equal to California in the Senate despite population, despite the size of the state, precisely to protect Louisiana from California. Your solution (if i understood correctly) gives California more power over Louisiana, which I think is opposite of their intent.

[/B]

Lots more politicians just what we need... it'd be better to divide by district the electoral college and award the them by district instead of winner take all. That would give everyone a voice instead of states like California where conservatives are overrun by liberals or visa versa in TX. Also there are 2 senators per state for a reason. That's the way the founders wanted it, and the way it should be. It gives the smaller states more of a voice. If you came up with this all yourself ? Impressive.. I haft to give you credit for that.

Some of these ideas, as I wrote in the OP, are from Larry Sabato and his excellent book. Thanks for the kind words.

I did indeed address the issue of 2 Senators per state. Did you read it?

Yes, Electoral College, but by congressional district, would also be a possibility.

It would have only changed the results in 2000: Gore would have won, if I recall correctly.

I dunno, maybe they would be less "politicians" and more "public servants" if the system of electioneering were more sane to begin with. Furthermore, being one of 1,000 reps carries less clout than being 1 of 435 - you have to work harder to actually make a record for yourself, maybe actually read legislation and such. So, instead of getting more politicians, maybe we would have more public servants.

But that cuts both ways: our elected officials also deserve an informed electorate worth serving, and not an apathetic, uninformed electorate that is highly reactionary.

 

[Tresha91203]

And Stat, this is one hell of a post you made here. I commend you for putting your back into it.

Sorry, but I am on a tablet so can't quote your last post to respond to without quoting way too much. Regarding one R and one D Senator in each state: I am uncomfortable with forever locking the US into this 2 party system. I feel it is part of the problem.

 

[Tresha91203]

[/B]QUOTE=Derideo_Te;8430419]

Even if there was just a web site where we could go to voice our opinion on which programs deserve funding...

How many of us would vote to continue millions in military aid to Russia and Egypt?

How many of us would vote to continue most favored nation trading status for China?

How many of us would vote for a little more money devoted to roads and bridges here in the USA?

If we have the ability to be that precise ... How about we add a link for filing income taxes electronically?
Make it a link where Americans that pay income taxes can divide the amount they owe among programs they wish to support ... Like Roads and Bridges, Military, Federal Government, Social Security, Welfare or Pork Projects.

That way we can make sure taxpayers are sufficiently represented in the capacity they contribute.
I mean if we are going to change the system to be fair by population ... Then fair by contribution would be equally justified.

.

Works for me! Similar to giving voters a line item vote on Budget Bills. That way the popularity of each item will be readily apparent to our representatives.[/QUOTE]

There are some things we don't know and can't know. No move is made in isolation. I suspect there are reasons BSO continued some of GWB's policies he disagrees with, and not all of them are nefarious. When I am presented with a more complete picture of something, my opinion is changed or refined. I trust that our Presidents are similar. The idea is to elect someone who would do it like you would if you had all the facts, and then trust (but verify when able) him to do it.

Also, this castrates him in global politics.

 

[Tresha91203]

I've loved this thread. Just a couple more thoughts:

No to messing with the supreme court except possibly that idea that no President can appoint more than 1. I think I like that idea but haven't mulled it over long enough. the SC is our last line of defense against the politician. He is appointed by our highest elected official and will never have to defend his position (unless abused). The 3 powers are seperate. It seems you are wanting to meld a lot together that was specifically designed to be separate, and with very good reason.

Also, there seems to be an assumed move towards Federal microrule. Not everyone wants to be a Californian. There is no need for New York to have undue influnce on Cleetus in Back Vacherie. We are far too big of a Country for the kind of homogeneity you are seeking. It is not necessary and not everyone wants it. What is wrong with allowing Utah to be Utah? We are all free to leave Utah for California to find our bliss if we choose. Cleetus is NOT going to be happy in San Francisco. He's not hurting anyone and he's perfectly happy where he is. Why the compulsion to mess with him?

The people speak through the House. The majority decides what needs to get done and starts it rolling. Then, you move to the Senate where the States get to look at it and decide whether then agree or if there is some hidden/unintended consequence that needs to be resolved or scrapped totally. Your proposal eliminates this safeguard completely. There is a reason the people don't get to rule without checks. Mob rule is pure emotion. The SC is the final protection. If we get screwed by the politicians, they are outside that influence. They are not defending their seat and they wont get fired. Their job is to stand up to both the politicians AND THE MOB without fear of reprecussion. I get the vibe you want the mob to be able to punish (therefor influence) the court. I feel this is bad.

Change is supposed to be slow. We were designed that way on purpose for a reason and it has worked well. This speeds up everything and may be reckless.

 

[Statistikhengst]

*bumped* for a number of members who are debating what just happened in the Mississippi runoff election on June 24th, 2014, between GOP incumbent Cochran and Tea-Party challenger McDaniel.

Now could be a good time to re-read the OP to this thread, which is spread over a number of postings at the beginning.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The Judicial

Term: 18 years (24 years for the Chief Justice)
Requirements: 40 years old, US citizen
Term limit: 1 term

The Supreme Court should be expanded to 15 justices + 2 alternates. Majority vote: 8, abstentions not allowed under any circumstance. For this reason, a 16th and 17th alternate judge would also be elected to decide on a case where a judge would decide to abstain, and they would rule in his stead. This would mean that ALL SC cases would have a vote of 15 voices, without exception. No 15 voices, no ruling, that simple.

Supreme Court Justices, other than the Chief justice, would be allowed to serve a maximum of 18 years, or possibly, 3 presidential terms. The Chief justice would be allowed to serve a maximum of 24 years, or possibly four presidential terms.

Supreme Court judges would be elected, but through a system of lists and then an election. Supreme Court judges would no longer be appointed by the President, nor would they be confirmed by the US Senate.

Someone wanting to be a judge would need to apply. His credentials would then go through a House committee, a Senate committee and then a Presidential committee.

A final list of 60 names would be provided for election day, the voters would select 15 of the 60 names (maximum) and the top 15 vote getters would be elected. Numbers 16 and 17 would be alternate judges. However, the sitting president would get to decide which justice would be the Chief Justice out of those elected to the Supreme Court, and that appointment would be approved by the US Senate. Should a justice leave before the end of his term for any reason, then the next highest vote-getter on the list (that would be nr. 16, for starters) would assume the position.

Judges would be elected in the MIDDLE of a presidential term, in other words, in the election for the House of Representatives. This means that elected Supreme Court justices would likely straddle the terms of two or three presidents.

I would like to note that many nations elect their judges, rather than appointing them.

Electing SC justices introduces politics in the same manner that appointing/approving them does. Prospective justices would make rulings that would favor whichever political segment they believed would get them the most votes. Worst of all would be the corporations funding the campaigns of prospective justices so that makes direct elections a disaster in my opinion.

That said there must be a better way to ensure that SCOTUS justices are nonpartisan. Sounds impossible because they are human but there actually are some out there who can put their partisanship aside and decide purely on the merits.

In my opinion the "litmus test" for any SC appointee is their track record on decisions that favor We the People over and above all other competing interests. Any prospective appointee with a track record of deciding in favor of corporations over We the People should be automatically disqualified.

When it comes to disputes between factions amongst We the People there will be divide between conservative and liberal viewpoints. That is where I propose a quota of 3 conservative, 3 liberal and 3 independent based upon voting records of all prior decisions relating to involving We the People. If a justice retires from that segment then the next one in line for that segment becomes the appointee.

So that leads into how I see the system working. No elections but instead an independent ranking organization comprised primarily of Law School Deans with the same 3 way quota. They would rank the best suited judges to become the next SC justice within their segment and when a position opened up whomever was at the top of that list would become the next appointee in order to maintain balance within the SC. The Senate would still vote to confirm the appointment.

There would be another little wrinkle here. If the Law School Deans believed that an appointed SC justice was no longer voting consistently in accordance within the principles of the segment to which they were appointed and/or voting against the interests of We the People the Law School Deans could nominate a replacement judge for the SC justice. If the Senate confirmed the replacement then that SC justice would be ousted by their replacement.

Yes, there is still room for corruption and collusion but the political element is far less pervasive and there is now a defined segment in the middle that must be swayed by the merits of the case to one side or the other and that makes it more likely that bad law like Citizens United will never make it through and good laws that uphold the rights of We the People will not be overturned in favor of special corporate interests in my opinion.

 

[Statistikhengst]

*bump* for the sake of discussion, especially considering the McDaniel lawsuit in Mississippi.

 

[Jroc]

Palin backs Tea Party favorite Joe Miller for Alaska GOP Senate nod | Fox News

 

[Statistikhengst]

Palin backs Tea Party favorite Joe Miller for Alaska GOP Senate nod | Fox News

That is interesting, has however nothing to do with the topic of electioneering, meaning, the nuts and bolts of electioneering - itself.

Would you perhaps like to make your own thread about this?

 

[Jroc]

Palin backs Tea Party favorite Joe Miller for Alaska GOP Senate nod | Fox News

That is interesting, has however nothing to do with the topic of electioneering, meaning, the nuts and bolts of electioneering - itself.

Would you perhaps like to make your own thread about this?

Endorsements are part of "Electioneering"...The primary battles between establishment and tea party candidates is also electioneering

 

[Statistikhengst]

*friendly bump after the software change*

 

[Statistikhengst]

Endorsements are part of "Electioneering"...The primary battles between establishment and tea party candidates is also electioneering

No. Endorsements are part of campaigning, not electioneering.

 

[Mathbud1]

on some great ideas and responses from GW and GT too.

I tagged some additional members whom I believe could make some excellent contributions. (Used the [Tag Users] function at the top since that is what it is for.)

Some of what you suggest is going to require Constitutional Amendments and that means that this is going to be difficult to implement. Not impossible, but harder than necessary. Overall I agree that we are way overdue for a complete overhaul.

My suggestions actually piggyback on the concept of voter involvement in elections via the internet and using unique ids similar to SSNs.

1. Compulsory voting for all citizens. Doesn't matter if you vote for Mickey Mouse but you must cast a ballot. This eliminates parties having to focus on "turnout". If everyone must vote then turnout becomes a non-issue.

2. Voting via the Internet is something that needs to done sooner rather than later. Yes, it is feasible and it eliminates the BS about long waiting lines and voting hours and all the rest of the ways that politicians are using to mess with voting rights. If we trust the internet to make credit card purchases (sometimes for thousands of dollars) then why can't we have a similar secure system for voting? Eliminates weather concerns too. Best of all counting electronic votes can be tallied in seconds and there are no "hanging chads" and other nonsense. Polls close and vote counts are known nationwide.

3. Allow permanent residents to vote in non Federal and non State wide elections. These are taxpayers too and since their taxes pay local municipal taxes and for schools it only makes sense that they should be allowed to enter the electoral process in this manner. (BTW this is already allowed in some states.) This is all part and parcel of greater involvement in the process rather than less.

Right now part of what is messing up the system is the deliberate and malicious process of driving voters away. A vote lost for your opponent is a vote gained for yourself. If voting becomes compulsory the incentive to drive away voters falls away (and so does the money to make that happen.)

The use of the Internet for voting eliminates the excuse for not voting. Every place that offers WiFi now becomes a potential polling station. College dorms, coffee shops, libraries, shopping malls and yes, in the comfort of your own home. Once again greater involvement across all registered voters means that trying to appeal on single issues to drive "turnout" becomes a non issue and again, it undercuts the benefit of outside funding.

Internet voting doesn't require a constitutional amendment. It can be implemented sooner rather than later and it makes the most sense to begin here because it will increase voter turnout simply because it makes it easier. It also increases voting in primary elections which are notorious for low turnout. This can eliminate a subset of the voters being able to restrict the choices of the greater electorate.

Anything that increases involvement in the election process means a democracy where votes count more than dollars. That is where we must begin in my opinion.

I'm not sure I like the idea of compulsory voting. It seems likely to only increase the number of completely uninformed votes. If you are voluntarily voting, it is because you have at least some semblance of a reason for voting for the candidate. If you are only voting because you have to, I think you will get a lot of people voting with no reasoning at all. Maybe it wouldn't be that bad. I'm not really sure.

As for internet voting: part of me loves the idea for the speed and simplicity in counting the vote, but another part of me is screaming that it is a very bad idea. There is no internet-connected system that cannot be hacked, and when the leadership of one of the world's most powerful nations is being decided by that system the motivation to hack it is extreme. Do you really want China to think, "If we just get past this firewall, we can decide who runs the U.S. government." That's more than a little scary.

 

[Jackson]

Election Rules and timelines.


Primary elections:

-The nation is divided into 5 geographic zones. Each zone has it's primary all on the same day. Zones such as:

-The Northeast /Acela States
-The South
-The Midwest
-The Breadbasket and Big Sky States
-The West Coast and beyond.

Here would be one possible, and very logical map:

-The order of the zones is determined by a lottery ball machine, just like the one used for the lotto. 5 balls go into the machine, the first one that comes out with the zone name on it is the zone that holds the first of 5 -and only 5- primary Tuesdays, and so forth. The lottery will be drawn on New Years's day of election year. Each state gets to decide whether primary or caucus, but they will be held for that zone on that day. No „first in the nation“ states any more. In this way, the candidates themselves do not know until New Years Day where to sink in their money, anyway, so instead of patronizing one region in order to get the upper hand, they stick to their general message and apply it to the ENTIRE nation.

-All pacs, polling and advertising for candidates would be illegal until New Years Day of election year.

-Primary 1: the third tuesday of February
-Primary 2: the first Tuesday of March
-Primary 3: the third Tuesday of March.

-Then, there is a one month break between the 3rd and fourth primary.

-Primary 4: the third Tuesday in April.
-Primary 5: the first Tuesday in May.

And a make-up date for any primaries cancelled due to inclement weather anywhere in the USA, and also for any run-offs, would be on the third Tuesday of May. Polling times and such: see: General Election

The National Conventions for all Parties would be held in June and must be completed by July 1st.

General Election:

The month of July and the first three weeks of August would be open for General Election fundraising. Official begin of the general election season: Labor Day.

Election Day: First Sunday in November, from 06:00 am till 9:30 pm for all time-zones, without exception. Early voting for all 50 states plus DC allowed for 21 days until election day. For states that do mail-in voting, 9:30 pm would be the cutoff for mail delivery. Provisional ballots allowed for all 50 states plus DC. Overseas and military ballots must be time-stamped by 9:30 PM EDT and must be turned in within 5 days of the election.

-Voter ID, a uniform form of ID used throughout the USA, also required to vote in all 50 states plus DC would be required.

-Automatic voter registration for all citizens when they reach the age of 18, with notification of such and information about polling place per postcard. The ID card for voting would be an exact duplicate of the first page of an American Passport, which means when you get a voter ID, it is easy to also apply for your passport at the same time and all of these things can be processed at BMV or SOS offices throughout the land. Oregon is currently the first state in the Union to seriously consider automatic voter registration, starting next year.

-The same Super-computer that did the redistricting also does a computation as to how many voting machines and precincts are necessary in order to get voting done by 9:30 pm and basta, done!

-Exit polling for all 50 states plus DC becomes mandatory for all national elections. Exit polling results are first allowed to be broadcast after the polls close in Alaska.

-The Networks would be forbidden to make any state calls until at least 45 minutes after poll closings and at least 25% of ballots from that state have been counted - and - the exit polling shows at least a +7 margin for the same candidate who is winning in the actual ballot count. This means that the first calls of the night, starting for all states in the Eastern Time zone, would be at 10:15 PM, and not one minute earlier. States that straddle two time zones would close in the time zone that is the most westerly of the two.

-National Popular vote running tallies would also not be published until at least 25% of the nation has reported in.

This methodology, though it may seem boring and lets us have less suspense, allows for the process to be done more quietly. In the event of a big win for someone, where the call for President usually happens around 11 pm, it would only be delayed until 1 or 2 am EDT.

For every single race in the nation, any margin under +0.5% would mean an automatic recount, without exception, but only once all provisional and absentee and overseas ballots are accounted for. Any candidate can also request a recount from between +0.5% and +1.0%, but then he must pay for it.

Due date for every state to submit final canvasses from the General election: Second Sunday in December, exactly 5 weeks after the election.

The electors would still meet in their respective states, but law would dictate that they must vote for the winner of the vote in their state, and in order to ensure that there are no „faithless electors“, the final slate of electors will be electronic across the board. So, the elector signing ceremonies would be mere formalities.

All of these suggestions of mine would make elections cleaner, fairer and more sane. It would eliminate a huge part of the money chase for election and would destroy the permanent election cycles that we are now suffering.

If you are going to elect someone to do a job as a public servant, then you also have to give him time to actually do the job without having to be torn to pieces by a crazy, hodge-podge election process that has grown into a veritable monster.

Wow! You have really thought this out. All of the points you made are good. One thing I have a problem with is mail in voting. It's too easy to be involved with fraud. Service men and women and the physically impaired should be the only ones getting mail in ballots. Perhaps those who need mail in ballots could get cards from your doctor the way handicapped license are handled.

 

[PhilosphyBeforeParty]

This thread is a project I have been working on for months, and this is just the tip of the iceberg. Putting it out on USMB is a promise I made to [MENTION=32163]Listening[/MENTION].

From the moment a US-Representative is sworn in, he or she is already planning and fundraising for the NEXT election. Huge PACS and Super-PACS are scrounging for money all year long. The media machine for all political parties is set to full-blast 24/7. Polling for the next presidential election started quite literally on the day after the last presidential election! We are now living in a permanent election cycle that literally never ends. This is not healthy for us.

Liberals complain that voter suppression is happening. Conservatives complain that there is voter fraud. Both sides have some very valid complaints. The last three presidential election have seen long-lines of people waiting to vote at polling places not equipped to handle that many people. Gerrymandering has literally made about 80% of the House of Representatives „safe“. And the list goes on and on.

In fact, it is just crazy.

In many ways, we have an electoral system that is designed for failure. That was surely not the intent of the founding fathers, but this is how it is working out and I think the time for some real common sense changes has come.

In this report, Conservatives, Moderates and Liberals are all going to find some things that they like and things that they don't like, but I ask of you to read all of it and digest it before commenting.

My main contention is that there is a severe structural flaw in our system of electioneering, namely, that very little of it is set in stone in the US Constitution. What was considered checks-and-balances has now become gridlock. And the rest, because of Federalism, is left up to the individual states to decide. And out of this, a hodge-podge patchwork of electioneering has evolved into a money making-monster.

So, I am a proposing a complete overhaul of our electoral system, but not an elimination of the „Electoral College“, as we like to call it. I am going to do this in four parts. Because of the length of this all, and to make it easier for you all to quote only one section, these four parts will be spread over postings 2-5 of this thread:

I. The Legislative (posting no. 2)
II. The Executive (posting no. 3)
III. The Judicial (posting no. 4)
IV. Election rules and timelines (posting no. 5)

Many of these things are things that Larry Sabato has also suggested in his book „Toward a more Perfect Union“, but many of them are also orginal ideas of mine.

The goal of all of this is to

a.) increase the amount of undisrupted time for governing between elections.
b.) streamline the actual time frame of electioneering.
c.) unify the rules for electioneering.
d.) reduce the money chase.

I am not saying that this is the only way to do this, but I do think that much of what I suggest is worthy of real adult debate. As I already wrote, each person will probably find some things he likes and some things he doesn't like, and that is good, for such sparks intelligent debate. Furthermore, I deliberately left out a lot of the reason for WHY I feel this way about many things. I did this to spur people to question or to come up with reasons themselves.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A friendly shout-out to all of these good people, from the Right, the Left and the Middle. I hope very much that you read all 5 opening postings and then comment. This could become one of the best discussions of the year.

[MENTION=31258]BDBoop[/MENTION] [MENTION=42916]Derideo_Te[/MENTION] [MENTION=40495]AngelsNDemons[/MENTION] [MENTION=41527]Pogo[/MENTION] [MENTION=26011]Ernie S.[/MENTION] [MENTION=9429]AVG-JOE[/MENTION] @Mad Cabbie [MENTION=42649]Gracie[/MENTION] [MENTION=20412]JakeStarkey[/MENTION] [MENTION=25505]Jroc[/MENTION] [MENTION=38281]Wolfsister77[/MENTION] [MENTION=21679]william the wie[/MENTION] [MENTION=23424]syrenn[/MENTION] [MENTION=43625]Mertex[/MENTION] [MENTION=37250]aaronleland[/MENTION] [MENTION=36767]Bloodrock44[/MENTION] [MENTION=36528]cereal_killer[/MENTION] [MENTION=40540]Connery[/MENTION] [MENTION=30999]daws101[/MENTION] [MENTION=46449]Delta4Embassy[/MENTION] [MENTION=33449]BreezeWood[/MENTION] [MENTION=31362]gallantwarrior[/MENTION] [MENTION=24610]iamwhatiseem[/MENTION] [MENTION=46750]Knightfall[/MENTION] [MENTION=46690]Libertarianman[/MENTION] [MENTION=1322]007[/MENTION] [MENTION=20450]MarcATL[/MENTION] [MENTION=20594]Mr Clean[/MENTION] [MENTION=20704]Nosmo King[/MENTION] [MENTION=43268]TemplarKormac[/MENTION] [MENTION=20321]rightwinger[/MENTION] [MENTION=41494]RandallFlagg[/MENTION] [MENTION=25283]Sallow[/MENTION] Samson [MENTION=21357]SFC Ollie[/MENTION] @Sherri [MENTION=43491]TooTall[/MENTION] [MENTION=25451]tinydancer[/MENTION] [MENTION=31918]Unkotare[/MENTION] [MENTION=45104]WelfareQueen[/MENTION] [MENTION=21524]oldfart[/MENTION] [MENTION=42498]Esmeralda[/MENTION] [MENTION=43888]AyeCantSeeYou[/MENTION] [MENTION=19302]Montrovant[/MENTION] [MENTION=11703]strollingbones[/MENTION] [MENTION=18988]PixieStix[/MENTION] [MENTION=23262]peach174[/MENTION] [MENTION=13805]Againsheila[/MENTION] [MENTION=20342]Ringel05[/MENTION] [MENTION=38085]Noomi[/MENTION] [MENTION=18905]Sherry[/MENTION] [MENTION=29697]freedombecki[/MENTION] [MENTION=22590]AquaAthena[/MENTION] [MENTION=38146]Dajjal[/MENTION] [MENTION=18645]Sarah G[/MENTION] [MENTION=46193]Thx[/MENTION] [MENTION=20614]candycorn[/MENTION] [MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION] [MENTION=29614]C_Clayton_Jones[/MENTION] [MENTION=18990]Barb[/MENTION] [MENTION=19867]G.T.[/MENTION] [MENTION=31057]JoeB131[/MENTION] [MENTION=11278]editec[/MENTION] [MENTION=22983]Flopper[/MENTION] [MENTION=22889]Matthew[/MENTION] [MENTION=46136]dreolin[/MENTION]

I wanted to have an intelligent debate with you about this, but quite frankly I don't find much fault in your reasoning. not many people hear that from me.

 

[PhilosphyBeforeParty]

The "fix" is so simple, it's painful. Given our technology, one-person, one-vote should be the way to go. Each registered voter is issued a one-time only access password. After they have presented appropriate identification proving their bona fides, they may then use that password to cast their vote. This prevents others from "buying" passwords to tip the vote. Once a password has been used, it is no longer valid. The reason for an electoral college is long gone.

what about the people who don't have internet access?

 

[Statistikhengst]

This thread is a project I have been working on for months, and this is just the tip of the iceberg. Putting it out on USMB is a promise I made to [MENTION=32163]Listening[/MENTION].

From the moment a US-Representative is sworn in, he or she is already planning and fundraising for the NEXT election. Huge PACS and Super-PACS are scrounging for money all year long. The media machine for all political parties is set to full-blast 24/7. Polling for the next presidential election started quite literally on the day after the last presidential election! We are now living in a permanent election cycle that literally never ends. This is not healthy for us.

Liberals complain that voter suppression is happening. Conservatives complain that there is voter fraud. Both sides have some very valid complaints. The last three presidential election have seen long-lines of people waiting to vote at polling places not equipped to handle that many people. Gerrymandering has literally made about 80% of the House of Representatives „safe“. And the list goes on and on.

In fact, it is just crazy.

In many ways, we have an electoral system that is designed for failure. That was surely not the intent of the founding fathers, but this is how it is working out and I think the time for some real common sense changes has come.

In this report, Conservatives, Moderates and Liberals are all going to find some things that they like and things that they don't like, but I ask of you to read all of it and digest it before commenting.

My main contention is that there is a severe structural flaw in our system of electioneering, namely, that very little of it is set in stone in the US Constitution. What was considered checks-and-balances has now become gridlock. And the rest, because of Federalism, is left up to the individual states to decide. And out of this, a hodge-podge patchwork of electioneering has evolved into a money making-monster.

So, I am a proposing a complete overhaul of our electoral system, but not an elimination of the „Electoral College“, as we like to call it. I am going to do this in four parts. Because of the length of this all, and to make it easier for you all to quote only one section, these four parts will be spread over postings 2-5 of this thread:

I. The Legislative (posting no. 2)
II. The Executive (posting no. 3)
III. The Judicial (posting no. 4)
IV. Election rules and timelines (posting no. 5)

Many of these things are things that Larry Sabato has also suggested in his book „Toward a more Perfect Union“, but many of them are also orginal ideas of mine.

The goal of all of this is to

a.) increase the amount of undisrupted time for governing between elections.
b.) streamline the actual time frame of electioneering.
c.) unify the rules for electioneering.
d.) reduce the money chase.

I am not saying that this is the only way to do this, but I do think that much of what I suggest is worthy of real adult debate. As I already wrote, each person will probably find some things he likes and some things he doesn't like, and that is good, for such sparks intelligent debate. Furthermore, I deliberately left out a lot of the reason for WHY I feel this way about many things. I did this to spur people to question or to come up with reasons themselves.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A friendly shout-out to all of these good people, from the Right, the Left and the Middle. I hope very much that you read all 5 opening postings and then comment. This could become one of the best discussions of the year.

[MENTION=31258]BDBoop[/MENTION] [MENTION=42916]Derideo_Te[/MENTION] [MENTION=40495]AngelsNDemons[/MENTION] [MENTION=41527]Pogo[/MENTION] [MENTION=26011]Ernie S.[/MENTION] [MENTION=9429]AVG-JOE[/MENTION] @Mad Cabbie [MENTION=42649]Gracie[/MENTION] [MENTION=20412]JakeStarkey[/MENTION] [MENTION=25505]Jroc[/MENTION] [MENTION=38281]Wolfsister77[/MENTION] [MENTION=21679]william the wie[/MENTION] [MENTION=23424]syrenn[/MENTION] [MENTION=43625]Mertex[/MENTION] [MENTION=37250]aaronleland[/MENTION] [MENTION=36767]Bloodrock44[/MENTION] [MENTION=36528]cereal_killer[/MENTION] [MENTION=40540]Connery[/MENTION] [MENTION=30999]daws101[/MENTION] [MENTION=46449]Delta4Embassy[/MENTION] [MENTION=33449]BreezeWood[/MENTION] [MENTION=31362]gallantwarrior[/MENTION] [MENTION=24610]iamwhatiseem[/MENTION] [MENTION=46750]Knightfall[/MENTION] [MENTION=46690]Libertarianman[/MENTION] [MENTION=1322]007[/MENTION] [MENTION=20450]MarcATL[/MENTION] [MENTION=20594]Mr Clean[/MENTION] [MENTION=20704]Nosmo King[/MENTION] [MENTION=43268]TemplarKormac[/MENTION] [MENTION=20321]rightwinger[/MENTION] [MENTION=41494]RandallFlagg[/MENTION] [MENTION=25283]Sallow[/MENTION] Samson [MENTION=21357]SFC Ollie[/MENTION] @Sherri [MENTION=43491]TooTall[/MENTION] [MENTION=25451]tinydancer[/MENTION] [MENTION=31918]Unkotare[/MENTION] [MENTION=45104]WelfareQueen[/MENTION] [MENTION=21524]oldfart[/MENTION] [MENTION=42498]Esmeralda[/MENTION] [MENTION=43888]AyeCantSeeYou[/MENTION] [MENTION=19302]Montrovant[/MENTION] [MENTION=11703]strollingbones[/MENTION] [MENTION=18988]PixieStix[/MENTION] [MENTION=23262]peach174[/MENTION] [MENTION=13805]Againsheila[/MENTION] [MENTION=20342]Ringel05[/MENTION] [MENTION=38085]Noomi[/MENTION] [MENTION=18905]Sherry[/MENTION] [MENTION=29697]freedombecki[/MENTION] [MENTION=22590]AquaAthena[/MENTION] [MENTION=38146]Dajjal[/MENTION] [MENTION=18645]Sarah G[/MENTION] [MENTION=46193]Thx[/MENTION] [MENTION=20614]candycorn[/MENTION] [MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION] [MENTION=29614]C_Clayton_Jones[/MENTION] [MENTION=18990]Barb[/MENTION] [MENTION=19867]G.T.[/MENTION] [MENTION=31057]JoeB131[/MENTION] [MENTION=11278]editec[/MENTION] [MENTION=22983]Flopper[/MENTION] [MENTION=22889]Matthew[/MENTION] [MENTION=46136]dreolin[/MENTION]

I wanted to have an intelligent debate with you about this, but quite frankly I don't find much fault in your reasoning. not many people hear that from me.

That is really kind of you!!

It's just a set of suggestions based on common sense and a desire to make electioneering fairer, more streamlined and less of a game.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Election Rules and timelines.


Primary elections:

-The nation is divided into 5 geographic zones. Each zone has it's primary all on the same day. Zones such as:

-The Northeast /Acela States
-The South
-The Midwest
-The Breadbasket and Big Sky States
-The West Coast and beyond.

Here would be one possible, and very logical map:

-The order of the zones is determined by a lottery ball machine, just like the one used for the lotto. 5 balls go into the machine, the first one that comes out with the zone name on it is the zone that holds the first of 5 -and only 5- primary Tuesdays, and so forth. The lottery will be drawn on New Years's day of election year. Each state gets to decide whether primary or caucus, but they will be held for that zone on that day. No „first in the nation“ states any more. In this way, the candidates themselves do not know until New Years Day where to sink in their money, anyway, so instead of patronizing one region in order to get the upper hand, they stick to their general message and apply it to the ENTIRE nation.

-All pacs, polling and advertising for candidates would be illegal until New Years Day of election year.

-Primary 1: the third tuesday of February
-Primary 2: the first Tuesday of March
-Primary 3: the third Tuesday of March.

-Then, there is a one month break between the 3rd and fourth primary.

-Primary 4: the third Tuesday in April.
-Primary 5: the first Tuesday in May.

And a make-up date for any primaries cancelled due to inclement weather anywhere in the USA, and also for any run-offs, would be on the third Tuesday of May. Polling times and such: see: General Election

The National Conventions for all Parties would be held in June and must be completed by July 1st.

General Election:

The month of July and the first three weeks of August would be open for General Election fundraising. Official begin of the general election season: Labor Day.

Election Day: First Sunday in November, from 06:00 am till 9:30 pm for all time-zones, without exception. Early voting for all 50 states plus DC allowed for 21 days until election day. For states that do mail-in voting, 9:30 pm would be the cutoff for mail delivery. Provisional ballots allowed for all 50 states plus DC. Overseas and military ballots must be time-stamped by 9:30 PM EDT and must be turned in within 5 days of the election.

-Voter ID, a uniform form of ID used throughout the USA, also required to vote in all 50 states plus DC would be required.

-Automatic voter registration for all citizens when they reach the age of 18, with notification of such and information about polling place per postcard. The ID card for voting would be an exact duplicate of the first page of an American Passport, which means when you get a voter ID, it is easy to also apply for your passport at the same time and all of these things can be processed at BMV or SOS offices throughout the land. Oregon is currently the first state in the Union to seriously consider automatic voter registration, starting next year.

-The same Super-computer that did the redistricting also does a computation as to how many voting machines and precincts are necessary in order to get voting done by 9:30 pm and basta, done!

-Exit polling for all 50 states plus DC becomes mandatory for all national elections. Exit polling results are first allowed to be broadcast after the polls close in Alaska.

-The Networks would be forbidden to make any state calls until at least 45 minutes after poll closings and at least 25% of ballots from that state have been counted - and - the exit polling shows at least a +7 margin for the same candidate who is winning in the actual ballot count. This means that the first calls of the night, starting for all states in the Eastern Time zone, would be at 10:15 PM, and not one minute earlier. States that straddle two time zones would close in the time zone that is the most westerly of the two.

-National Popular vote running tallies would also not be published until at least 25% of the nation has reported in.

This methodology, though it may seem boring and lets us have less suspense, allows for the process to be done more quietly. In the event of a big win for someone, where the call for President usually happens around 11 pm, it would only be delayed until 1 or 2 am EDT.

For every single race in the nation, any margin under +0.5% would mean an automatic recount, without exception, but only once all provisional and absentee and overseas ballots are accounted for. Any candidate can also request a recount from between +0.5% and +1.0%, but then he must pay for it.

Due date for every state to submit final canvasses from the General election: Second Sunday in December, exactly 5 weeks after the election.

The electors would still meet in their respective states, but law would dictate that they must vote for the winner of the vote in their state, and in order to ensure that there are no „faithless electors“, the final slate of electors will be electronic across the board. So, the elector signing ceremonies would be mere formalities.

All of these suggestions of mine would make elections cleaner, fairer and more sane. It would eliminate a huge part of the money chase for election and would destroy the permanent election cycles that we are now suffering.

If you are going to elect someone to do a job as a public servant, then you also have to give him time to actually do the job without having to be torn to pieces by a crazy, hodge-podge election process that has grown into a veritable monster.

Wow! You have really thought this out. All of the points you made are good. One thing I have a problem with is mail in voting. It's too easy to be involved with fraud. Service men and women and the physically impaired should be the only ones getting mail in ballots. Perhaps those who need mail in ballots could get cards from your doctor the way handicapped license are handled.

You know, I used to have that thought, too. But Oregon has been doing mail-in voting for almost 20 years now and without a hitch. So, apparently, it really can work.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Glad to see this thread getting some revived traffic.