Monday, May 9, 2016

Modernizing Elections – and idea whose time has come - This project is almost ready to launch

Still looking for feedback and suggestions - This project is almost ready to launch

Modernizing Elections – and idea whose time has come
Most Americans were shocked and angry to discover that their votes did not decide primary elections.  In both major political parties “delegates” are selected to attend a convention and they vote for the candidate of their choice.  Frequently these delegates are influenced by the political establishment of their party and they do not always choose the candidate who had the most votes in the primary election.
Americans may not have been aware of this corruption at the primary level but It wouldn’t take a Mensa member to suspect what was happening.  Think about it a minute; we elect and send our representatives to Congress and once they move to DC they no longer do the bidding of those who elected them.
Representative forms of government are all subject to this type of corruption.  My church is another example.  The national denomination is attended by elected “delegates”.  But the power structure within the church has been hijacked by left wing activists.  So when the delegates arrive they are sent to “workshops” (dare I say “reeducation propaganda pressure groups?) to influence their vote.  Our national denomination now supports gay marriage, gay clergy, boycott of Israel, and gun control.  If there were a method of allowing the members of our churches to vote directly, none of these issues would prevail.
In the political arena newly elected representatives frequently are idealistic enough that they still think they should represent those who elected them.  The party leaders and the committee chairmen realize that “doing the will of the people” would weaken if not destroy the elite power structure that is firmly in place.  By the time these newcomers first term is over they have become part o the “good ole boys network, or the party bosses will make sure they are not reelected.
So be it a political party, a union, a church, or any other organization that establishes policy using elected delegates or representatives you can be sure that the establishment power brokers are who is really making the decision.  If you participate in any organization that uses “delegates” or “representatives” to make policy decisions you have been disenfranchised. See “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington”
We have all been disenfranchised.
Of course it turned out this way.  When our institutions were created it was at least a three day horseback ride to the state capital.  By 1860 The fastest mail delivery was the Pony Express, who could get letters from St. Joseph, Mo., to Sacramento, Calif., in 10 days. After 18 months, however, the Pony Express ceased to exist when the complicated operation became too expensive.  By 1861, however, Western Union had laid the first transcontinental telegraph line, making it the first nationwide telegraph company. 
Theoretically, by the end of the 19th century the establishment power structure could have begun to be deconstructed.  Local elected leaders could have held town hall meetings in every community and voted by telegraph thereby eliminating the clustering of power in one place.  Needless to say the ensconced power brokers in centralized locations weren’t about to help that solution to be applied.
The Canton style of government in Switzerland is a good example of how it should be done if we want a stable political foundation and personal freedom.  The 26 cantons of Switzerland are the member states of the federal state of Switzerland. Each canton was a fully sovereign state with its own border controls, army and currency.  Public meetings and personal votes by individual citizens still establish legislation and policy. Unlike many other nations, Switzerland is not on the brink of national disaster.
By now many of my readers have begun to see where I am going with this article.  The clustering of power in “capital cities” creates an environment where corruption can be expected.  However, with the advent of the Internet we no longer need centers of political power.  It is now technologically possible to empower citizens to vote directly on issues and there is no longer a need for representatives to gather together in a cluster of influence and power and our government can truly become “of the people, by the people, and for the people”,

Legislative, Judicial and Executive are the three institutions of government that are provided for by our constriction.  The trunk that makes those branches possible is the citizens.  It is the power of the citizens (the trunk) that is missing from the plan of our founding fathers because it was not possible to give the citizens access to the power of voting directly in the 18th century. 

What would a reasonable, rational plan to make the citizens the “trunk” of government look like?

One of the things I do for a living involves the behavioral sciences.  When an individual or a group wants to change habitual behavior one of the recognized effective techniques is “incremental desensitization”. The simple explanation of that principle is to create increments that are easily achieved and to continue that process until the full change has been created.  I wrote an article about this process that can be found at


Any suggestions on where to start?  Remember each increment should not be more difficult than a “3” on a scale of one to ten.

No comments: