h a l f b a k e r y"Not baked goods, Professor; baked bads!" -- The Tick
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
This system is designed to force voters to knowingly elect officials for office based on their suitability rather than other, outside factors. This will help get rid of the "I'm voting for her because she's a woman and I am too" or "I'm voting for him because he's on the Republican ticket, and I'm a
Republican" that always happens during every election.
Under this system, people would be given time or accomplishment credits for reading free candidate-related material in libraries and on officially monitored websites, or taking free classes given at community centers, local campuses and other places which are logged on a central system. These credits are tagged onto the voter's social security number. When they go in to vote, the accrued credits are tallied, and weight their votes according to how much they have educated themselves on who/what they are voting for. Also, transcripts can be requested from the central office, which can be presented, sealed, to the voting centers that aren't equipped with computerized voting booths.
With this I would also do away with the Electoral College - something I'm not sure if our non USAsian friends are familiar with.
Granted, the number of uninformed voters a candidate attracts would still play a pivotal role in politics, but those that do put the time in would be rewarded by making their votes count for more.
1/4 Baked
Voting_20Test
Definitely warm and doughy, but not flaky on the outside yet. [CaptainClapper, Sep 30 2009]
[link]
|
| |
Either the materials you get credits for reading are government-provided, in which case they are not impartial anymore, or you get credits for reading anything that someone slapped the 'political' label on, in which case ist might be anything in the triangle of porn, propaganda and partiality. |
|
| |
Also: This would only be fair if the value of reading-up would be taken from the least read-up candidate, for every voter respectively, otherwise one might have missed the best....
And this in turn would bring every nutcase who always wanted his/her ideas to be read by someone to apply for official posts... |
|
| |
So we set up an impartial (bipartisan, but I hate that word) council that can approve material. All materials would have to be fact based, including references. |
|
| |
bipartisan won't cut it, think kilopartisan at the least |
|
| |
[UB], fact based like biographical information and voting history, perhaps along with a short personal statement from the candidate. |
|
| |
Not "fact based" like J.K. Rowling being knighted for writing a popular novel. Also, not Congress, the Bush administration. It's a presidential medal. |
|
| |
While I also want better-informed political decisions, I seriously doubt that this would help: I don't want to wade through a bunch of boring and mostly irrelevant information if its not needed for me to make up my mind, and the people with the time to spend days reading Government-prepared documents are not the people I want making decisions for me. |
|
| |
I'd prefer weighting votes by voter income. |
|
| |
I'd prefer not. That way leads to Parliment and PBS shows like Upstairs/Downstairs. |
|
| |