Corrupt Government: My 10-point Fix
This is my 10-Point Fix for government, a newsletter about restoring Americans' faith in their representatives actually representing them.
So, Is Our System Broken, Really? Or Really Broken?
More than ever, we need leaders from, and still tied to, our communities, committed to setting an example for their colleagues in Congress to do what they're actually paid to do, as our employees—represent our best interest. Can you count the number of times you’ve seen a poll showing the vast majority of Americans believe something firmly, yet their representatives overwhelmingly vote the opposite on issue after issue? Wouldn’t you love an app that easily shows your representatives’ voting records on issues that matter to you? Well, keep reading because that’s one of the 10 fixes I hope will also resonate with you.
I’ll start first by listing what I believe all citizens should have a right to: The right to health & wellness (physical & emotional) without the fear of bankruptcy; The real “right to work” & still be able to afford to raise a healthy family (on a living wage); The right to keep that family safe without the media's pervasive, dro(w)ning fear campaign about weapons of war in so many unstable hands (bazookas and tanks can’t be sold at flea markets, so why can assault rifles?); The right to education, particularly how to compete in a global economy where hungrier nations are eating our lunch because of our policies of greed. Embodied for 40 years as “Trickle Down” (aka “Voodoo”) economics, your representatives have tricked us into fortifying foreign economies by offshoring profits and outsourcing the very jobs key to our resilience as a nation—not only destroying families overnight, but equally, anathema to community sustainability, much less national competitiveness.
Food, Work, Safety, and Education shouldn't have to be demanded. Our nation, the wealthiest on Earth, the great American experiment, and democracy itself, have been sold to the highest bidder for the better part of half a century. Is this what Free Market Capitalism was meant to produce? Because the makeup of Congress, enabled by intentionally byzantine congressional district maps, seems to continue to be disproportionately comprised of wealthy white people, shown to openly disrespect the needs and desires of quite a different class of citizens—their constituents, a spectrum of colors and trades from all walks of life. Our politicians grow dramatically richer, again, disproportionate to their represented, not because they mastered a remarkably valuable trade or even inherited wealth, but because access to the halls of government, where things can be fixed, is a corrupted process from day one, stocked with hungry capitalists favored by funding long before their constituents pulled the lever on election day. Once elected, if not due to the sheer inertia of money “invested” in their campaigns, they’re often more beholden to their “supporters” than their electors. To me, it’s unacceptable that politicians amass wealth by selling us out—over and over, showing more loyalty to self-service than public service. One of my favorite public servants recently set out to prove how thirst for power has poisoned American capitalism, and it echoes many of the points made in this article—former U.S. Secretary of Labor and Berkeley professor, Robert Reich’s 1st article in the series, “Why American capitalism is so rotten”. And for a slightly more visual portrait of how we got here, this is a masterful whiteboard.
I don’t want to be too cynical—admittedly there are likely some politicians doing the right thing, living off their salary…and some that were already rich or didn’t take big corporate money. But the nature of elections still requires even the few good ones to solicit and raise obscene sums of cash, or they simply cannot compete against the morass of paid propaganda from their opponents. It remains shocking to me that politicians feel emboldened enough to admit, on the record, that they spend 50% of their paid work hours dialing for dollars. If you have time for a deeper report, here’s 60 Minutes piece on the subject. Needing to constantly be raising money for their next election (every two years in some cases) is counterproductive to their very job description. Inefficient, ineffective, unconscionable, unacceptable. Would you hire an employee if they told you they’d be spending half the time you pay them for looking for their next job? Of course you wouldn’t—and you shouldn’t have to. But somehow, this conundrum isn’t on the news every night. I’ll discuss the devolution of our news media later, below.
But sure, sometimes important issues do find a path to debate. So, does it offend you, too, when the first and easiest objection to an important subject that requires public spending is, "but how can we afford all that?" or "who's going to pay for that?" These knee-jerk, regurgitated talking-points, fed to us incessantly as if unquestionable, immovable facts, illustrate perfectly how government corruption has quietly eroded previously noble, untouchable institutions otherwise empowered to help us address and answer those same questions (e.g., education, health, journalism itself), that for the Greatest Generation were hands-off because they were seen as rights that made us stronger, part of our cultural fabric—part of the American Dream. It is my observation that we have all but lost our collective memory of history, and a growing percentage of us see the American Dream as irrelevant, if even plausible.
For-profit media outlets obscure the truth that an economy should reflect the collective values and needs of its people, and not simply be a megaphone for the few conglomerates and billionaires wily enough, and shameless enough, to flood the air waves in order to sell us things we don’t need and promote the politicians we should not want. One of Media’s primary functions is to serve as a public check/balance to expose corrupt practices, and it did that brilliantly when I was growing up and later when studying journalism myself (call out to my idol then and still,). But that was when news divisions were not required to turn a profit. Mainstream media is now big business, powerless against profit motive. The 80’s ethos that greed is good still runs Wall Street, and Wall Street runs K Street, and K Street, our government. “Shareholder value” is a glossy, seemingly innocuous term used by financiers and the media alike to both obscure and cleverly embed this "profit-at-all-cost" obsession, as if it were the only ethos and responsibility a corporation should concern itself with. This same relationship dictates our politicians’ decisions. Pay to Play is the rule of the day.
Luckily, companies and communities are beginning to recognize that their customers and constituents demand more than just the single bottom line of profit and are beginning to employ “Triple Bottom Line” accounting, with reports now showing many corporations deliver stronger profits by doing so. You’ll hear it referred to as “People, Planet, then Profit”. I go further—“People, Planet, Prosperity”, because money without purpose is soulless. And, Prosperity is Purpose. The growing ranks of “Benefit Corporations”, Public Banks, Cooperatives, and even the growing unionization movement are all powerful and meaningful expressions of the trend toward transparency and accountability in business. I believe this same trend should apply to the politicians making laws and regulations that influence stock prices, ironically, the main metric contributing to the wealth of executives. Some of the fixes below aim to bring that type of accountability into the open, and put it squarely in our hands.
Management compensation is already grossly disproportionate to its workers'. The problem is that it has been shown for decades now that profit-at-all-cost costs-us-all™ via an almost rhythmic boom/bust cycle, resulting in predictable bailouts, paid for by all of us. Avoidable industrial disasters, increasing natural disasters and the decaying health of U.S. citizens are all symptoms of a system that ignores the fact that the people are the ones building wealth for the offshore/owner class determined to care less for the very planet and its people, yet that they themselves will still need functional if to fully reap the bounty of their riches.
The truth is that "we can afford that", just as my grandfather and his generation chose to wade straight into harm's way in a time of global need, like on the beaches of France, or more recently when we decided that putting a man on the moon was a good expression of who we are and what we're capable of. We just chose to do it when we decided to connect our growing cities with interstate highways, or power them naturally with fantastical turbines driven by our many great rivers. We were able to rise to the occasion then, because our representatives then were still public servants, actually representing their constituents' best interest. They had vision, and shared purpose.
Are we making a choice every time a check is cut for a no-bid defense contract, or to subsidize Big Oil, Big Pharma, or Big Ag? Because, increasingly over the last 40 years our representatives seem to have no problem spending our savings on issues that they and their financiers get rich off.
Our system promises to allow us to choose representatives that will represent us. But that choice is confused when we have only two parties; that choice is obscured when our media is driven by profit; that choice is trampled when voting districts are gerrymandered; that choice is silenced when we have suffered pervasive, perverse miseducation. Decreased investment and privatization of education has led even the word socialism to now be confused with communism, despite the fact that our greatest public accomplishments are socialist manifestations that fuel our competitive advantages—partly why immigrants still line up to cross our borders. Civics are rarely taught anymore—reflected as easily by road-rage as in the vitriol of our politics. So, is it surprising that personal financial responsibility isn’t top-of-mind in an era where many still believe greed is good, bankruptcies a strategy, and accountability-free bailouts just how the system works?
When people learn how things used to be, and that our system was designed to make their choices matter, the first choice should be deciding what kind of people we are, what type of place we want to live in, and what boundaries we want to push past...again...and choose to set the bar higher for the rest of the world in doing so. Our Greatest Generation chose far greater sacrifices than anything we face now.
To the point—while it appears that manipulating human weakness and vulnerability deftly enables the perversion of our political system (fear and greed, primarily, but as Facebook shows, manipulating all 7 sins earns similar profits), our public servants, in both parties, now openly flaunt their wealth & power with impunity (eg. Joe Manchin, a coal-rich, yacht-residing, Maserati-driving Democrat?) by serving themselves long before they consider serving the constituents who entrust them while paying for their representatives’ now equally perverse standard of living. This must change. This can be changed.
So, before it’s too late, I decided to ask those of you reading this if you want your beliefs represented, your opinions reflected, your values defended. Do you believe in one person/one vote? Do you have a few minutes to find out?
If so, I’ve spent the last 24 or so combined years as a volunteer helping manage two non-profits, and running various fixes up my flagpole, some borrowed, some original...and have finally settled on the plausibility of 10 points to fix corrupt government and restore faith in the experiment of democracy. I would love your thoughts, sincerely—love. Because I believe our system is good at its core, but it’s been weakened by the power of greed and confused by miseducation and the insidious power of for-profit media, now entertainingly delivered 24/7 on screens as small as your watch face, by prettier-than-you newsreaders in pervasive soundbites across networks no longer employing actual journalists doing actual research.
The power of greed may be an overwhelming human instinct, but so is the power of flight over fight for some...and yet we still managed to fight for what was right not so long ago, sacrificing short term inconveniences for long term prosperity...but that was the last great generation. It's time to empower the next great generation to live up to why so many from all over the world still flee to our shores for the freedom they once read about. If we continue to elect personal profiteers over public servants, (and elections are always pending, aren't they?) we could all but erase all that was good. It’s our time to speak up and bring our system into 21st Century Enlightenment.
This is my megaphone. But I am just one voter and I hope to hear any of these solutions reached you and that you share(d) them...or added to them. Just comment below, and I promise, if relevant, I'll write them into the next edition and credit you justly. Because I think what's below is pretty obvious, common sense stuff, by and large. But I'm posting this hoping to learn more "what you believe."
Full Disclosure: I am an American citizen, and though I last registered as a Republican, I am frustrated with both political parties and believe it has been clearly evidenced that we need at least a third party in order to accelerate change and save democracy. I also believe that politics should be discussed at the dinner table (-:
Overturn Citizens United: Allowing unlimited and anonymous “donations” to politicians has created a culture of “self” service which is anathema to "public" service. Nobody gives to politicians without expecting a return on their investment. Even if that return isn't necessarily traceable, monetarily. Nobody.
The conservative Supreme Court made the worst non-legislative decision in my lifetime by reasoning that corporations deserve the same 1st Amendment right as natural persons, thus allowing untraceable, unconscionable sums to flow to freshman and to career-politicians (aka full-time tax-paid inside lobbyists with the power to create laws and undermine regulatory protections), while individual citizens are limited to contributing only $2700. This is not free speech, it’s paid-for influence that no “natural person” could possibly afford to compete with—not even considering that the media outlets perpetuating myths (for profit) are owned by many of the same corporations buying our representatives. IT IS BRIBERY. Nothing good comes of this. But change is not likely with this current Supreme Court, so we need to...
Take fundraising out of Campaigns: It’s widely known, even admitted openly, that politicians spend over 50% of their time campaigning for their next election. Would any business owner hire, much less retain an employee who openly admitted spending half their working hours looking for their next job? Politicians work FOR us; their job is to do OUR bidding. Some states have instituted matching funds rules, but this is also counterproductive, only upping the ante for big donors and causing politicians to have only more debt to pay back.
So, my suggestion is that we try NO campaign ads, NO lawn signs, NO billboards. Kind of like how nice it'd be if we buried all the overhead electric lines cluttering our blue skies—just imagine how refreshing our environment and discourse might feel?! All that's needed is for politicians to make their promises via a few published position papers on their websites and on whatever local journals still exist, and a couple public TV debates a few weeks before the elections. That is ALL we'd really need know who to vote for. Just look at some of the vastly unqualified, undignified, unscrupulous members of the congress now and you'll see that more money and more media clearly doesn't help us know more about our lawmakers.
Sadly, however, the reality is that no policy can stop money from finding its way into the pockets of hungry “public servants”. Even if we succeed in reforming campaigning, they’ve got plenty of other ways to get theirs. So, I also propose to...
Reconcile Benefits to Service: Healthcare and Pension are the two biggest reasons workers stay in jobs they hate, and conversely, most business owners would prefer their employees have motivation beyond just benefits. And most Americans are growing weary with “career” politicians. So, instead of free "cadillac" healthcare plans and lifetime pensions after only a brief time in “public” service, I propose (and many now support) that we “reward” public servants with benefits for actually serving their public...however, and this is key, their benefits must be reflective of their actual service, e.g., giving them one year of paid healthcare and pension income for every year they served! And a further caveat I'd suggest is that the plans they receive be only as good as the plans their median constituent enjoys!
Watch how fast we have universal healthcare and workers' rights restored. This is fiscally responsible, and fiscal responsibility seems to be a recurring theme around election time, doesn't it? And yet, we continue to fund unfounded wars and other pet pork barrel projects, leaving the next administration to clean up the mess. Often, the same administrations that started a war concurrently issued expansive tax cuts for the rich, only further depleting the ability of the next administration to make any meaningful repairs. There is no evidence that tax cuts for the rich are good for anyone but the rich themselves, who in the last 40 years have exponentially accelerated their wealth while the average American can’t even keep up with inflation. Even Baby Boomers and retiring X-gen’s are having to gamble with the equity in their homes or sell their life insurance policies just to survive.
Addendum: Addressing a "Hidden" Benefit, AKA “Insider Trading”. How is it that most freshmen congressional representatives enter DC relatively representative of their constituents’ median income level (which is $68,000) but within a term or two most are millionaires? Are they teaching high finance in night school at The Capitol after session every day? We all know it’s because politicians are lobbied so much that they become fully aware of movements on Wall Street and Main Streets everywhere which their legislation will affect. Whether they benefit directly and simply aren’t caught, or whether they trade that knowledge for tips from their buddies on other committees, the fact remains that they amass tremendous wealth and it infects their ethics, assuming they had any to begin with. A step toward pressuring this corruption out of our system would be to require FULL disclosure of a politician’s assets prior to, during and after elections, and to "publicly" publish their performance, both legislatively and financially, during and after their "public" service. They should be required to also report any beneficial interest in any public company or one which provides income or benefits to them or related parties, including family and friends. That may sound challenging, but I'm sure you've heard the phrase "there's an app for that".
And if those fixes don’t cause some to consider the earning potential of their career path, there’s another way to limit undue influence in shaping policies that often take decades to unwind, and that is to...
Impose Term Limits: Even #45 campaigned saying he thought they were a great idea (yet after gaining the oval office suggested that he thinks lifetime presidency—read: dictatorship—is also a good idea after China's Xi ruled it so for himself). Lobbying in Washington is out of control, and everyone knows it. It's why too many politicians get into national politics—for money. I know, good luck convincing sitting congresspersons to vote for any of the above points, right?
Well, you've also likely heard politicians pounding their chests about our founding fathers this or that...well, the founders never envisioned career politicians. So, out of respect for our founders, I propose no more than two terms or six years maximum for any Federal "paid" elected public office—that way even if they take money under the table (and they will), they won’t have long enough to deliver their “investors” enough returns without it being glaringly obvious even to an oblivious public. If they really love being a public servant, no problem—just keep climbing the ladder, or just be satisfied that local or state office is more than worthy of your service—besides, "All Politics is Local", right? I'm not suggesting that public service should not be allowed as a lifetime career; I'm just asserting that stagnation breeds inefficiency and/or corruption. Anyone can serve—just not in the same role long enough to reward lethargy or invite corruption. There is a similar argument against tenured educators, but I’ll leave that for another post.
People who say we need intelligent, experienced politicians to run such a complex government are simply wrong. The fact that more than a few candidates for high office were qualified simply because they had some success on college football fields in their youth should concern us all. I believe, like the GOP says it believes, smaller government is better...but only through efficiency (and automation) can we shrink our bloated halls. It will not be achieved by ignoring white collar crimes while massing petty criminals in overcrowded prisons. We will not achieve a more perfect union by dismantling regulations or privatizing everything. These tactics have shown to lead only to the destruction of the social fabric and the environment we rely on to remain healthy...and thus, competitive. So, if you need experienced politicians, guess what? Most federal politicians held some office before they got to D.C., so they can learn the federal system fast enough. After all, there is an app for everything else, right? Our kids are programming super computers in 4th grade. We can do this—we just need the will of the people to demand it...with their votes, as Mr. Buffett says.
True representation would not require our elected leaders do much more than sit down before every debate (if that’s actually still a thing), pull up their smartphones and read their own constituents’ positions, and by actually talking with their constituents if they weren't holed up dialing for dollars or holding fundraisers for their next election all the time. I know you might be thinking “but the polls can’t be trusted—they showed Hillary would crush TFG right up to the last hour, so how can anyone trust polls?” And that’s fair enough, because I also have a beef with “news” outlets using pollster “findings” to influence how we should “feel” about developing issues...for one big reason: because they rarely show the actual survey questions, much less “how” those questions were asked/framed, probably because that’d take longer than our pharmaddicted ADHD brains allow us to focus on anyway, or for that matter, allow enough time in the hour for the glut of advertisements selling us insurance we can’t afford for drugs we don’t need for illnesses we don’t have. But of course, I have an answer for that too, and it’s a phrase you’ve already read above...
“There’s an app for that”: Let’s be honest—a monkey could do the actual work of most politicians, if the work of politicians was simply to pull the lever the majority of their constituents told them to. That solution would bring us closer to true representation, and certainly deliver more accountability than we have now. But there are some benefits to having a human champion and not just a well-trained simian.
This may be a tough one to get your head around, but it is entirely feasible. Start by providing a free app to every citizen who says they want their voice heard—even a free smartphone if they don’t have one—and with enough free bandwidth for the app while we're at it. Congress spends billions every year on things we know nothing about and that we eventually learn did not benefit us. Spending far less on a simple app is plainly worth accurate representation, isn’t it? Well, all this "free stuff" would come with one big agreement that even the staunchest conservative should agree is worth it—every time an issue or legislative action that affects that citizen is up for a vote, their device’s screen yields to the app just long enough to present that issue to the voter, in plain language. The screen would display in the user’s native language a simple description of the issue, a multiple choice quiz to make sure the voter understands that issue, a hard # in $ and ¢ as to what that issue’s passage should cost them personally (based on their address and stated income bracket), and lastly, a YES/NO option. And yes, all of this is private, encrypted and anonymous. When completed, their device goes back to regular use. If they don't vote, it stays in vote-now mode until they do, or until they unsubscribe from the service and return their fate to the hands of someone likely owned by a billionaire, corporation or industry. Of course, unsubscribing from this benefit would require them to pay for their phone and bandwidth out of their own pocket. And yes, the app would even provide them a list of all the corporations their current reps and prospective candidates are invested in or beholden to, just in case you were wondering.
Though such digital diligence may seem unnecessary for some dependable voters, consider what else this app will do to inform voters of their representatives' actual records! The app would gather and tally their politicians' actual votes in real time, and make their records accessible in an instant to anyone interested in knowing if the person they put their faith in is actually representing their interests. Further, with the meteoric rise of Artificial Intelligence, it could display their records in myriad graphical/statistical ways, by user preference, showing, for instance, “how did my rep vote based on my needs?” Or “how did my rep vote compared to my neighbors', county's, state's tabulated and transparent preferences?”, or “how often did my rep vote against my party’s positions?” Further, the app could instantly display “what committees is my rep on, and how does his/her investment portfolio compare?” Or by state or by demographic or by issue...and so on. Bottom line, when politicians vote against any/all of their constituents' will (which would now be fully transparent and on the freely accessible public record), they will not be able to hide behind diversion or rhetoric, and may be impeached or voted out quickly, even by referendum...or prosecution!
Beautifully, this app could also make the process of notifying your representatives that you agree or disagree with their decisions by simply clicking a button which instantly sends them a note or dials a call to their office # (or mobile #!). PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY!
If you need more validation on this idea, here’s a good read: https://independent-mediainstitute.org/voting-booth/
But another hot topic on the mind of many is due to the fact that five presidential elections resulted in the will of the majority of people unreflected in the election results. It may be time to...
Retire the Electoral College: the fact that a Wyoming resident has 3.6 times more voting power than one Texan or Californian or Michigander is simply wrong. The Electoral College fails us repeatedly because, arguably, it was designed specifically to make sure a (senile, ignorant, inexperienced, antagonistic, narcissistic) populist had one final check before getting the nomination—how’d that work in 2016? Opponents cite that less populous states are disadvantaged by the big ones—yet, isn't that offset by the Senate itself? Others cite slave states were fearful of losing their power based on population alone, so it was a short-term consolation. In my opinion, it served to grant protected status to wealthy land owners. That's why WY and MT and SD are hotbed domiciles for profiteering Chicago School of Economics capitalists like Dick Cheney, and are curiously also lucrative tax havens. Surprised? http://bit.do/electoral-college. Read it.
Deeper into electoral controversy are “Electors”, “Delegates” and “Superdelegates”. There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires Electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their states. Many describe the process of determining which candidates get the party nomination using the term “backroom dealing”. This lack of transparency only invites controversy. Democrats and Republicans hold different rules for this process, as do states. And even though the Democratic Party recently stopped Superdelegates (delegates not bound to vote for the party’s choice, nor by popular dictate) from affecting change in the first ballot, it would benefit voters if we simply made the primary function like the general election. Here’s a good .gov article for more thought on this subject: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/electors.html
Regardless, the Electoral College is outdated and we have many examples of better, less costly ways to give all citizens the belief that at least their reps won’t be corrupted, at least until after a fair election )-: From my research, the best of these models is the Ranked-Choice method where (especially useful in multi-party contests, which is another subject for discussion) voters are asked to rank their favored candidates in order of preference. This path helps solve many of the issues with Two-Round elections, for instance. A highly cogent argument for Ranked-Choice elections can be read here: https://www.vox.com/polyarchy/2019/3/21/18275785/electoral-college-ranked- choice-voting-president-democracy
Another movement afoot would undercut the perversion of the Electoral College. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is an agreement to require all state/territory electors to pledge all their votes to the winner of the national popular vote. Since its introduction in 2006, 16 states and the District of Columbia have joined, representing 205 of the 270 needed to achieve the goal. More on this movement here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact#:~:text=The%20National%20Popular%20Vote%20Interstate,and%20the%20District%20of%20Columbia
Restore Constitutional Checks & Balances: A table can only stand on three legs or more. Mitch McConnell’s recent kneeling on the issue of gun control exposes that the Senate is without a leg and thus grants too much executive power—fully exampled by their acquittal after Cheeto Benito’s impeachment(s). Among numerous compromises to the balance of power, such as the Department of Justice having been reduced to little more than a law firm for the president, we must renounce the justification of Presidential Privilege as a means of obstruction, at least for congressional inquiry. Kill the Justice Department’s OLC "rule”—it is NOT a law. We must reinforce with our laws that the President is no different than any other citizen, in that he/she is not above the law. Just as the Pope is finally beginning to hold his clergy accountable, if a crime is committed in the White House, then prosecute as the law dictates we must. The argument that indictment would be too much of a distraction for a president to carry out their function holds no water, especially when the person defaming the office is doing little more than profiteering off a PR stunt gone horribly wrong. We have a Vice President for such matters...and plenty of other solutions after that.
And winding down with some easier subjects...
Prohibit Gerrymandering: Accountability by design is a complex challenge, but the bottom line is when one party in power can strategically draw lines on a map and effectively choose their own constituents, corruption has already begun. So, at the end of the day, as with “There’s an app for that”, I believe we need to figure this out. Mixed Member Proportional representation seems a fine option. Here’s a good thread if you want to comment on this one: https://www.reddit.com/r/NeutralPolitics/comments/97j7t8/ what_are_the_arguments_for_and_against/
End or limit the Filibuster: If the purpose of the filibuster was to give voice to the backbenchers (as our parliamentary friends solve by electing a speaker of the house who must denounce his party affiliation while seated), we can do better. As also argued in support of the Electoral College, if protecting the minority is a justification for the filibuster, consider the system of government as a whole is much better: the separate branches, the checks, federalism. It’s not the role of the Senate alone to protect minority interests. I don't claim to have a solution for this, but if watching Ted Cruz read Green Eggs & Ham solely to disallow the function of government made you as sick to your stomach as actually eating green eggs would, I suspect you may have some thoughts here. Great article from an unusual source on this subject: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/killing-off-the-filibuster-would-end-the-senates-undemocratic-pretensions-2019-09-13
Move elections to Weekends!: Tuesday elections cause fewer working people to be able to vote. Hold elections on Sundays when most people have time to consider the implications and privilege of their votes. Or, as my brilliant cousin suggested after reading this point, "make Election Days national holidays". I agreed and suggested if Britain’s elite can institute a "Bank" holiday every month of the year, surely we can grant voting a day off! Here's a centrist view: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/08/05/fight-voter-suppression-move-election-day-to-weekend-slaughter-ornstein-column/537456001/
Anyway, that’s just me. These are just my opinions. I'm just one voter. Now it’s your turn. Please comment. Loudly.
Scott E. McIntyre
Founder, Executive Director: WEconomy-US, Inc - an economy for the rest of us. Dedicated to Complementing & Compounding Local Economic Development — http://WEconomy.US
Contributor, Advisor: Sustainable Communities Framework
Partner: Renaissance Park Corporation
Thanks for reading Corrupt Government - my 10-Point Fix! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.