This may be the first of many nonpartisan political posts for me, but I suspect that whether you’re Democrat or Republican, conservative or progressive, far left to far right or anywhere in between, the one thing we can truly agree on is…
Government should not be for sale.
Whether it’s an elected office or an issue, majority vote should rule. I’m so sick of this or that organization sending me an email stating, “We need to fight/win this… can you send us $X?” – as if throwing money at the problem is going to solve it. As if enough money can buy a victory. That’s just deplorable.
What’s perhaps more deplorable is that they’re right.
And what’s even more deplorable is that this has become essential.
It has become essential because the special interests are throwing their money around. They give generously to the campaigns of our representatives, then, when the time comes, they say, “time for the payback.” And if the overwhelming majority of that Senator’s constituents feel differently? Too bad. Unless, of course, enough money can be raised to publicly pressure them into voting with their constituents and against the big money donors that sent them to Washington. But what, then, when it’s time for reelection?
To say that our government is badly broken is an incredible understatement. Likewise, saying that we need to break the hold of special interest groups and lobbyists on our elected officials is mind-numbingly obvious. That we need major, significant campaign finance reform? DUH?!?!
I think it’s time for a new political party. The Reform Party of America. The party platform? One plank: Majority rules. Rewrite campaign finance laws until special interests (and their fat checkbooks) have been purged from the political process and the voice of the majority is the deciding factor.
Following is an interview with fictitious Reform Party of America candidate, Roger E. Form…
Q: Where do you stand on the issue of a flat income tax?
A: Whatever the majority of my constituents are for, that’s how I’ll be voting.
Q: Where do you stand on the issue of gun control?
A: Whatever the majority of my constituents are for, that’s how I’ll be voting.
Q: But aren’t you a lifelong member of the NRA? As well as an avid hunter?
A: Yes, but that really has no bearing. As a member of the Reform Party of America, I’m sworn to vote in accordance with the wishes of the majority of my constituents.
Q: So, regardless of your status as an NRA member, you would vote in favor of gun control if the majority of your constituents were for it?
A: I live in Texas and, if elected, I’ll be representing Texans. Fortunately for me, the majority of my constituents share my personal views on gun control, but as a member of the Reform Party, I would absolutely vote in opposition to my personal beliefs if that was the intent of the majority of my constituents.
Q: How would you respond to your party’s critics who say that this is an utopian viewpoint and not actually possible?
A: I have taken the pledge to vote in accordance with the wishes of the majority of my constituents, regardless of my own personal beliefs or stance on any given issue. Other Reform Party candidates across the country have made the same pledge. If my constituents elect me, that’s one. And I’m personally committed to setting an example. To proving that, yes, people can live up to their promises – even if it means doing something or voting in a way that’s not necessarily in keeping with their own personal views. As the example is set, and other Reform Party candidates set the same example, the public will have to realize that, at some point, this is possible. That this vision can become a reality.
Q: How do you propose to know the wishes of the majority of your voters?
A: By facilitating the means and opportunity for them to sound off on any and all issues that I’ll be voting on. The Reform Party wants to do everything possible to make it easy and convenient to sound off on an issue. The Internet, of course, makes short work of such a task, but obviously we have to give voice to those with no Internet access. One possible way to do this is using the “One Laptop Per Child” approach to put a connected voting device in the household of every person that wants one. Those who can afford to pay for them, do so, and in so doing, subsidize those who can not afford to pay. Another possibility (which is probably less costly) is to place public voting terminals in public places, from grocery markets to laundromats to check cashing businesses, etc.
Q: Wouldn’t such public terminals create serious potential for voting fraud?
A: There’s already a model that demonstrates how safe something like this can be. They’re called ATMs, and they operate with little or no susceptibility to fraud. As long as we treat votes with the same level of seriousness that we treat bank account balances, there’s really no reason to think this can’t work.
Q: How does your party propose to purge special interests from government?
A: By any (legal) means necessary. [candidate chuckles] Really, whatever makes sense. Whatever will work. One proposal I’ve heard is to enact election reform law such that primaries are used to narrow the field down to three or four (or some reasonable number that’s greater than two) candidates. Then, all campaign contributions are made to the race and not to a specific candidate. All the candidates in that race (as ratified by the primary process) are then entitled to equal shares of the campaign finances.
Q: So when a special interest group gives money to the candidate of their choice, they’re actually giving equally to all the candidates in that race?
A: Precisely. And since that pretty much defeats their purpose, they can simply hang on to their money and use it for purposes that will hopefully benefit the local, national or global economy in some way, whether it’s creating jobs or through some sort of trickle-down. If you think about all the money that goes toward electing every candidate at every level of government from local/municipal to Federal, the numbers are staggering. The potential good that could otherwise be done with all that wasted money is one of the cornerstones of the Reform Party of America, and the reason that I, and every other Reform Party candidate have taken the pledge.
Q: So, at some point, there’d be no good reason for private campaign contributions?
A: That’s the hope.
Q: By giving each person a single vote on every issue, are you, at some point, moving toward a system where elected officials are obsolete?
A: Off the record, I suspect that most Reform Party candidates would tell you, “Hey, I’d be fine with that.” But realistically, I’m not sure that’s plausible. Running a government, at any level, is pretty much a full-time job. Average Americans have enough on their plates just trying to pay the mortgage, raise their families, plan for college expenses and retirement, and so on. Most don’t have the bandwidth to be actively engaged on every single votable issue. But there will be issues that they care about deeply, and on those issues, they’ll want to make their voices heard.
Q: Where do you stand on the issue of gun control?
A: I believe that whatever the
If anyone wants to form and run the Reform Party of America, by all means go for it. I wish I had the time, but I just don’t right now. Maybe later I’ll run as a candidate, though…
